When did the world start getting to see grand jury materials?
Congressional oversight of the Exec is a Cons utional power (until the SCOTUS 5 s rule it's "political")
You said "world", I said Congress
If you actually read the dismissal, the argument to dismiss the case was based on a technicality (whether the initial interview with Flynn was "material" to an investigation or not).Hiding exculpatory evidence from the defense and lying to the Judge is just a...”technicality”
Something that was argued before in the case, where Van Grack argued that it was material, and the judged agreed with. This is why the entire move is uncommon and fishy. This is the DOJ withdrawing over a point they already won in court.
NBC admits Chuck Todd's 'Meet the Press' deceptively edited Barr remarks on Flynn
#Obamagate trending
hive mind
The judge agreed with Van Grack on materiality because he knew no better. The judge wasn’t aware that Van Grack was withholding do entation from the FBI saying to shut down the months long Flynn investigation after coming up with zero derogatory information.
The man who handed over all the do ents to Nunes and basically got the ball rolling on exposing everything is back
"wrong about pizzagate" ^
“still wrong about russiagate” ^
On materiality
Lawfareblog Doubles Down With an Actual Legal Author — but Gets Same Bad Results
https://www.redstate.com/shipwrecked...mpression=true
Hey Comrade - I notice you only "cherry-pick" garbage from tweets and NEVER from sworn testimony - UNDER OATH - so I cherry-picked some tidbits for you to run away from -
this is McCabe under oath answering questions about FISA and REAL COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE:
MR. SCHIFF: I want to ask * follow up with a couple of questions aboutthe FISA application.
MR. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. SCHIFF: I have been on the committee for about a decade. This isthe most scrutiny we have ever given lo any FISA application. lt's more thanappropriate for us to scrutinize a FISA application of a U.S. citizen, so there'snothing wrong with that.
MR. SCHIFF: But nonetheless, the amount of focus on this particular onesuggests to me it is about more than just the fact that it was a FISA application.
So let me ask you this: I think there's a sense in the outside - outside ofthis building, that if the FISA application was fraud in any way, then the wholeinvestigation crumbles.
So I want to ask you: What was the role of the FISA application in thisinvestigation? And let me ask it this way: Had the FISA application not beenapproved by the court, would the investigation have ended?
MR. MCCABE: No, sir. The investigation of Carter Page would havecontinued without the use of the FISA technique. And certainly, the investigationinto Russian influence in the 2016 campaign would have continued.
MR. SCHIFF: And thE would have continued?MR. MCCABE: Of course.
MR. SCHIFF: And the investigation of Flynn would have continued?MR. MCCABE: That's conect.
MR. SCHIFF: And the investigation of Papadopoulos would havecontinued?
MR. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. SCHIFF: So all that would happen even if the court had turned itdown?
MR. MCCABE: That's conect.
MR. SCHIFF: So tf the information about Fusion GPS and an attorney,and the Democratic Party and the Washington Free Beacon, and all of that hadbeen in the FISA application and had been tumed down, the investigation would
I
MR. MCCABE: Yes, sir.
84
I
85
have gone on?
MR. MCCABE: Thafs right. FISA is one investigative technique. We
had dually predicated cases against the individuals you mentioned. We weregoing to investigate those cases with whalever techniques were at our fingertips.Had we decided not to pursue FISA, or had the FISA been turned down, we wouldhave continued investigating without it.
MR. SCHIFF: lf you had credible allegations that a U.S. person wasessentially acting as a foreign agent of an adversarial power, would it be negligentof the FBI not to investigate that?
MR. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. SCHIFF: ln this case,
Correct?
MR. MCCABE That's corect.MR. SCHIFF: You also
ls that also true?MR, MCCABE: That's conect.
MR. SCHIFF: So you apply for the FISA application. The FISAapplication is granted. did you learn that Carter Page had
MR. MCCABE: That's our assessment, yes.
MR. SCHIFF: And it's also your assessment that
ls that true as well?MR. MCCABE: That is true.
I
r
MR. SCHIFF: And as a result of the FISA, you learned that -- and other
MR. MCCABE: That's correct.
MR. SCHIFF: And in fact, as a result of your investigation and the FISA,
85
MR. MCCABE: That's right.
MR. SCHIFF: And in fact, Mr. Steele
MR. MCCABE: He did.
MR. SCHIFF: And so if we were interested in confirming what part of thedossier is true and what part is not true, the FISA application has actually helped,has it not?
MR. MCCABE: lt has.
MR. SCHIFF: Now, let me ask you about, if I could, the role of the Steeledossier because I think there's a similar theory outside the building that if theSteele dossier can be discredited, the whole investigation goes away or can bediscredited.
You've already testified that the investigation began not because of theSteele dossier, but because of the information about George Papadopoulos. lsthat right?
I
I
I
87
MR. MCCABE: That's conect.
MR. SCHIFF: So let's say that you never received the Steele dossierWould you still have
MR. MCCABE: Yes. We opened the J case before we had thedossier.
MR. SCHIFF: And would you still have investigated Mike Flynn?
MR. MCCABE: Yes.
MR. SCHIFF: Given that some of the information in the dossier has been
corroborated in part by the FISA, but through other investigative means as well,would it be negligent not to try to determine how much else of the dossier wasaccurate?
MR. MCCABE: lt would be negligent not to determine that. That'scorrect.
MR. SCHIFF: Did you ever accept the dossier as the last word? ln otherwords, you were going to rely on this and no further investigation necessary?
MR. MCCABE: No, sir.
All those blanks/empty spaces - are REDACTIONS - from Trumps/BARRS DOJ....
"but-but - FISA - means the whole thing is a HOAX!!! I TELL YA!"
So you also dont believe that the Russians interfered in our elections along with Hater, Spurtacular, and Darrin?
That was never what “Russiagate” was about. You’ve been told this numerous times by numerous people. And I’ve already answered yes to your question about Russia interfering numerous times.
^this ain't russiagate
these lawyers should listen to TSA, he/she knows Flynn, Trash, and his mafiya are innocent being compromised by Pootin
Nearly 2000 former DOJ officials sign letter calling on Barr to resign over his ‘assaults on the rule of law’
Barr to resign over his “political interference” in the Mike Flynn case,
it would be best for the integrity of the Justice Department and for our democracy for Attorney General Barr to step aside,”
“demand that [Barr] answer for his abuses of power.
We also call upon Congress to formally censure Attorney General Barr for his repeated assaults on the rule of law
in doing the President’s personal bidding rather than acting in the public interest.
Our democracy depends on a Department of Justice that acts as an independent arbiter of equal justice,
not as an arm of the president’s political apparatus.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/nea..._campaign=4505
Pretty amazing infographic but sucks on a mobile
Grenell
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
