Bradley Moss and John Yoo Debate “Honest Mistake -vs- Nefarious Intent” Within Anticipated IG Report…

National security attorney Bradley Moss and former assistant attorney general John Yoo appear on Fox News to discuss the issues around a constructed Russian conspiracy; a politically corrupt special counsel; the pending IG report on possible FISA abuse; and the ongoing predicate review by U.S. Attorney John Durham.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Abusive Cops, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

239 Responses to Bradley Moss and John Yoo Debate “Honest Mistake -vs- Nefarious Intent” Within Anticipated IG Report…

  1. Fred says:

    There are no “Honest Mistakes” in that level of government. There is only some nefarious idiots doing treacherous, and treasonous acts.

    Liked by 31 people

    • L4grasshopper says:

      If it were an “honest mistake”, the perps would have fessed up to it by now.

      Liked by 13 people

      • A2 says:

        Not so fast. Isn’t that one of the pillars of Sidney Powell’s defence of Gen Flynn.

        The one guy said the difference is that McCabe (and Grier) pled not guilty.

        Liked by 1 person

        • jx says:

          Has McCabe been bankrupted? His family threatened? Maybe his plea would change.

          Liked by 9 people

          • A2 says:

            Well, how do you know Flynn is bankrupted. I thought he had a healthy go fund me account.

            As for McCabe’s family threatened, I bet they were judging by the crazy social media activists.

            It is wise not to make assertions on something you read on twitter, or crazytown blogs. I am sure if Flynn was threatened, as a former Lt.General he would have ample protection. He has sent twitter messages, enjoying vacations and messages. Not screaming he is in danger.

            Like

            • WRB says:

              https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/michael-flynn-to-sell-his-house-to-offset-legal-costs-report
              In part, it states

              Flynn has been increasingly concerned over “crippling legal costs” the case has brought and is now planning to sell his house to offset the costs, according to a source who spoke to ABC News.

              Until McCabe sees the same impact on his life and finances, there is no justice. And of course the feds should go after his wife for whatever trumped up charge…just to punish him.

              Liked by 6 people

              • rayvandune says:

                McCabe was investigated by the Trump DOJ, while Papadopulos and Page were investigated by the Obama DOJ. The Trump DOJ will try fairly with a presumption of innocence, but the Obama DOJ was thoroughly corrupt and was not investigating at all, but entrapping. That’s the difference.

                Liked by 1 person

              • rayvandune says:

                McCabe was investigated by the Trump DOJ, while Papadopulos and Page were investigated by the Obama DOJ. The Trump DOJ will try fairly with a presumption of innocence, but the Obama DOJ was thoroughly corrupt and was not investigating at all, but entrapping. That’s the difference.

                Like

              • JeffP says:

                Has someone hijacked A2’s account? These are not replies consistent with the attitudes I have seen in the past from A2. I could be wrong. I may be thinking of another 2 symbol named persona…
                Either way General Flynn has been abused badly by Mueller and the rest of the Corrupt government entities, like FBI DOJ etc. etc. Anyone that thinks differently is a dishonest fool.

                Like

            • John-Y128 says:

              “I bet they were judging by the crazy social media activists.”
              People like you – get off the stage!

              Like

            • todayistheday99 says:

              An equivalent scenario would be if the “prosecutors threatened” McCabe to plead guilty or else they would go after his wife for tax evasion.

              Liked by 5 people

            • Brian in CA4 says:

              Don’t forget that the special counsel prosecutor also threatened to go after Flynn’s son to coerce the guilty plea from Flynn that they needed to lend credibility to their sham investigation…scumbags of the nth degree. Add that to how they covered up the Hillary email investigation and there is little doubt that it was nefarious….”honest mistake” is a joke IMO…purely political misuse of government power.

              Liked by 1 person

          • Moe Grimm says:

            indeed and my sentiment exactly…. and what tribe is mcabe a member of? It sure as hell isn’t mike flynn’s who they went after just like others.

            Liked by 1 person

          • ozymandiasssss says:

            That’s really not an excuse. I would never ever plead guilty to something I didn’t do. Even if it cost me everything. I think Flynn will eventually withdraw his plea; I can’t imagine what all this jumping around with Brady material is for if he is not going to change his plea.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Sharpshorts says:

              Agreed, it’s hard to reconcile Flynn’s guilty plea.
              I too think it will be withdrawn eventually.

              I also like to speculate that he is was (and is) still
              serving his country and his President
              by his plea, ie: to push the bad guys, to further expose
              the false and nefarious climate that they created.
              I also like to think “Retired” Admiral Rogers is still in this fight as well.

              Wishful hoping perhaps, but as our President has said
              “somebody had [has] to do it”…
              I refuse to believe that PDT is totally alone in this fight.
              .

              Liked by 2 people

            • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

              I would never ever plead guilty to something I didn’t do.

              Huh.

              Guess you don’t have kids.
              The government threatened to do what they did to Gen Flynn to his son (who had a brand new baby)
              Totally EVIL.

              It would be bad enough if the government stuck it hard to me……I can’t imagine the agony of them trying to do it to me AND MY SON.

              Liked by 3 people

              • ozymandiasssss says:

                Well, what you are saying is his son committed a crime and he took the hit for him. So my answer stands, unless one of my kids was guilty of a criminal charge of some sort. They give you a lawyer if you can’t afford one and they can get paid extra if the case is complicated, but it still stands if you aren’t guilty you do not plead guilty.

                Like

                • ozymandiasssss says:

                  I mean, I go through this with a co-worker I argue with all the time. He asks me, if there was nothing there, why did Flynn and Papdopalous lie about it? and frankly, I don’t have a good answer and that is very frustrating.

                  Like

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  NO I DID NOT.

                  Read it again.
                  “The government threatened to do what they did to Gen Flynn to his son”

                  Like

        • underwhelmingposter says:

          A2: Is that one of the pillars of Ms. Powell’s defense of Mr. Flynn???
          Isn’t it that the Fibbies were listening in on Mr. Flynn, knew what he said and nailed him on his remembering of the content of the calls that the Fibbies had been listening to for months.
          Isn’t it true that they had Rosenstein authorize persecuting Mr. Flynn’s son.
          McCabe can plead not guilty because the deep state has his back (lawfare et al).

          Please add your sage wisdom to the conversation.

          Liked by 1 person

          • A2 says:

            Ok, you are baiting me. My contention all along is that if Gen Flynn was innocent he would have entered a no guilty plea. He did not. If he had, discovery would have moved the entire spygate case forward. I still do not understand why if he did not lie, he said he did. He has not entered even at this late date a revocation of his plea.

            Sidney Powell’s defence is partly predicated on the exculpatory information to mitigate the sentence. She has presented evidence concerning Flynn’s Fara filings as an Honest mistake.

            As for the other alleged contention that the AAG was targeting Flynn Jr. that has not been factually proven, just speculation. And if Flynn Sr was motivated to plea guilty to protect his son is risible. Makes a nice story, but if his son did nothing wrong, what’s the point? Gen Flynn involved his son in his consultancy that he set up the focus of the Turkish operation and the FARA potential violations.

            Facts matter, emotional bias not so much.

            That’s the way I see it for now.

            Like

            • Newhere says:

              You are confusing issues and misconstruing the evidence and arguments Powell has put forth, and for what purpose. The FARA issue has nothing to do with Flynn’s “defenses” as you’re suggesting. Powell put forth the “honest mistake” evidence you’re talking about to show that Flynn has met the obligation in his plea agreement to cooperate in other proceedings (i.e., that he cooperated, but wouldn’t lie). Because the government looked like it was going to claim he didn’t, since he lie for them.

              Your posts suggest this “honest mistake” issue is related to Powell’s insistence that prosecutors follow the court’s Brady order to produce exculpatory evidence; it’s not. The point there is that prosecutors have engaged in egregious misconduct by hiding evidence, and hiding evidence that would show their own obfuscation and lack-of-candor before the court — and that for that, they should be held in contempt.

              We’ll see how these issues play out; but your characterizations are flatly wrong, and sound disingenuous.

              And Powell confirmed that prosecutors threatened Gen. Flynn’s son.

              Facts do matter. So does reading carefully and summarizing accurately.

              Liked by 4 people

              • Newhere says:

                Since he *wouldn’t* lie for them

                Like

              • A2 says:

                Yes of course she may argue that, if she is a good attorney, and we know she is.

                Like

                • Newhere says:

                  That’s what she did argue. Either you haven’t read or didn’t understand the pleadings. I’m done here, as you’re trolling and not serious.

                  Like

              • littleanniefannie says:

                I don’t believe that the FARA violations were an honest mistake. I think they were “settled DC practice”. If Flynn was the exception then the Podestas would have registered. They weren’t and didn’t register until AFTER Flynn was charged AND it was revealed that they were guilty of the exact same thing. More proof that there is truly a two-tiered justice system, especially when it comes to politicians. My Lord, Congress even established a tax-payer funded SLUSH FUND to pay for their own sexual and racial indiscretions. To this day, we don’t know who we’ve paid for or how much they’ve paid! Using the word HONEST with anyone involved in the government automatically qualifies it as an oxymoron!

                Liked by 5 people

                • Newhere says:

                  Again, different issue. Yes, it’s true, a bunch of lobbyists for foreign governments are crawling around DC having not registered. Agree, but separate issue.

                  The prosecutors want Flynn to say that when he DID fill out the registration, he “knowingly” put incorrect information. Powell’s point is that no, Flynn DIDN’T “knowingly” fill it out wrong; he accepted in hindsight there were mistakes on the form; but when he signed and filed it he did so in good faith — and this is the reason they waived privilege for former counsel on this matter — because he was being advised on how to fill out the form and explicitly instructed his lawyers to be sure to be accurate and precise, which is evidence that if there’s something wrong on the form — which again, Flynn’s testimony would be, “yeah, OK” — it certainly wasn’t what something he did “knowingly.”

                  And to reiterate: this IS NOT a crime that Flynn pleaded guilty to; this has to do with testimony prosecutors wanted in a separate case; and given that they wanted FALSE testimony from Flynn in that case, it seems there’s really a lot more we need to on that one too.

                  Following all of this really requires reading the pleadings and keeping the issues straight. It can get confusing.

                  Like

              • bayoukiki says:

                Nice job of straightening that out. One addition – Powell is shooting for the big one, claiming the entire matter should be dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct (a concept not foreign to Mueller team members). She’s doing the nation a service by going there, to unmask the nefarious nature of some (not all) prosecutors who wield the immense power of the federal government to crush citizens

                Liked by 3 people

            • chipin8511 says:

              Flynn wearing a wire per George Webb 2015

              Liked by 1 person

            • Kintbury says:

              Well that certainly is odd because I read of proof that Rosenstein authorized Mueller to go after Jr for leverage.

              Like

            • ozymandiasssss says:

              I think you are 100% right. Only possibility is this firm that represented him pulled the wool over his eyes somewhat and set him up with that “I lied” statement to lock him down and told him things like “The President is going down, get out while you can with a slap on the wrist, etc. etc.” That’s pretty shady if it happened. She needs to withdraw the plea and get on with it and I have to assume that is what is in the works.

              Liked by 1 person

            • Raptors2020 says:

              Actually, A2, facts don’t matter. Remember the name Andrew Weismann? His motto is “You can convict an innocent man. It just takes a little longer”. If Flynn had pleaded not guilty, Manafort would have a roommate now.

              Read up sometime on how they framed a totally innocent man, Conrad Black. Facts don’t matter, perception matters.

              Evil exists in this world. Just pray it doesn’t notice you.

              Liked by 2 people

            • Diana Allocco says:

              “As for the other alleged contention that the AAG was targeting Flynn Jr. that has not been factually proven, just speculation.”

              It’s a very recent revelation from Powell: https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/11/flynn-lawyer-rosenstein-mueller/

              “Rod Rosenstein Authorized Mueller To Investigate Flynn’s Son, Sidney Powell Says”

              Like

          • A2 says:

            You still cannot erase the fact he pled guilty to the charge. He has not, under former or current counsel rescinded that plea.

            If he does, then your point may have validity.

            Nothing is stopping him from withdrawing his plea.

            Liked by 1 person

            • ilcon says:

              Lift the cloud from your eyes. Search for how many plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit.

              Pleading guilty does not mean they are.

              COERCION

              Liked by 6 people

              • 100% correct. I generally love A2’s comments and reporting, but I invite him to visit county court any day of the week. If you can afford 10,000 to fight a DWI or low level felony, you get what you pay for. If you can’t, you also get what you pay for. Pleading and innocence are irrelevant, other than in fantasy land. Against the Special Counsel, you can multiply the numbers by 100 – 200. You may win in theory, but you will not survive the experience.

                Like

                • gary says:

                  bingo. like trump said, i’m screwed,’ when he heard about the special counsel. he had done nothing wrong.

                  Liked by 2 people

                • ozymandiasssss says:

                  Good lawyers don’t do that. But you are exaggerating a bit. Almost all defendants are guilty of something. They might get overcharged but rarely is one just completely innocent, and in those instances, clearly a good lawyer would not recommend they plead guilty.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Raptors2020 says:

                  The poor man has the choice of pleading not guilty, and spending a year in jail awaiting trial, or accepting a plea bargain, and maybe getting probation. An obvious choice to most.

                  Like

            • bayoukiki says:

              She is not asking to withdraw the plea for a very valid reason – if the plea agreement goes then the government can go forward with its threats to go after Flynn, Jr. (Not sure they would do that now that the spotlight is on them though). If she can get the whole case thrown out for prosecutorial misconduct then Flynn’s record is clean

              Liked by 3 people

            • LULU says:

              Re pleading guilty, a prominent defense attorney once told me that guilty pleas are not a confession of guilt. In Flynn’s case, it is believed that he plead guilty to take threatened heat off of his son.

              I am seeing some crafted propaganda on this sub-thread… Lawfare?

              Like

            • ozymandiasssss says:

              Correct, A2, that has been my question all along. Withdraw the damn plea and get on with it. He’s going to have to have a good excuse for why he issued the “I lied” statement.

              Like

            • Newhere says:

              Powell has made clear they are looking to have the case dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct — meaning wrongdoing on the government side, in which case no need to withdraw plea because it was the product of a set up. She’s also clarified they aren’t ruling out a plea withdrawal, but the inference being that withdrawal would be the second option behind total dismissal.

              The way your comments summarize the facts doesn’t match public facts.

              Like

        • Newhere says:

          Actually, no, it’s not a pillar of Sidney Powell’s defense, actually. Powell is arguing that the accusations against Flynn, and resulting charges, were illegitimately and unlawfully brought from egregious prosecutorial misconduct, and that his “guilty” was offered under unethical pressure and duress. She’s seeking to have the charges dismissed because of such egregious misconduct — the premise being that not only is the defendant not guilty, his guilty plea was in the first place only obtained by prosecutorial conduct so shocking that it’s an insult, and missing the point for Flynn to have to withdraw it — the charges should be dropped, period.

          So, no, nothing to do with honest mistake, actually.

          (The “honest mistake” has to do with something entirely different, nothing to do with his plea or his defense; it has to do with what would have been his testimony in another proceeding. In yet more egregious prosecutorial conduct, the prosecutor WANTED Flynn to say as a witness something that wasn’t true: that he “knowingly” filled out a Foreign Agent Registration form incorrectly, when in fact Flynn always has maintained that he did not; he accepted, in hindsight, that it was incorrect, which is much different than saying you “knowingly” filled it out incorrectly. Either way — witness testimony, not a defense.)

          Liked by 5 people

          • A2 says:

            Sorry, you have proved my point.

            Like

            • Newhere says:

              Then I guess your point was about the opposite of what you said.

              Liked by 2 people

              • A2 says:

                No. I am not going to get into a slinging match with you. I expressed my reading of the situation, on the same public information you have. I see it it differently. I have no emotional investment in this case, except that justice prevails. I have no thumb on the scale. We are not the ones arguing in a court of law, just spectators. As such, we may learn by our differences of opinion.

                Liked by 3 people

                • Newhere says:

                  But you are mis-stating the facts and significance of the “honest mistake” issue in Flynn’s case, to try to color a comparison between McCabe and Flynn that doesn’t match up. If you correctly presented the issue, I’d be quite interested in your opinion and ready to learn from what you have to say.

                  Flynn is not “using it as a defense.” The question is one of what is the substance of Flynn’s testimony in a case where he’s testifying; the government says the substance SHOULD be one thing; Powell explained that Flynn’s testimony, if it is truthful, is another thing; the government knew what Flynn said and what his testimony would be — but kept trying to characterize it differently, and Powell was forced to call that out — because it was risking having an adverse affect on whether Flynn’s cooperation would be acknowledged. Point being — the context was his cooperation with the plea deal. NOT a defense.

                  Opinions are fine, but when you start arguments with “not so fast” it’s best to be able to spell out your point with information and summaries that are correct and not get things wrong.

                  Liked by 3 people

            • A2 says:

              That is what is called an honest mistake as argued by his attorney. Geesh. His case is essentially closed as he plead guilty to the charge of lying. The rest is exculpatory. His attorney is wedging in these circumstances to get either his case thrown out on technicalities or at least convince the court to return a sentence suspended.

              Liked by 1 person

              • American Nationalist says:

                Except there’s nothing fundamentally honest about what the prosecutor claimed. There’s a substantial difference between having filed incorrectly and deliberately filing falsely. Which Flynn didn’t state because that would actually be a false statement!

                Basically the Mueller Special Counsel was trying to suborn false testimony to get a conviction. A Weissman specialty. Now that Flynn refused to play his part in the charade, the DOJ literally confessed in that case that the Court should proceed anyway which is utterly laughable.

                As things stand, the DOJ is at risk of losing both cases and I actually agree with Gowdy: One consequence of lying in court is to be held in contempt and lose law licenses. We’d all be better served if none of those actors could practice law ever again.

                Liked by 3 people

              • willyeye says:

                I get the feeling that you haven’t ever had to deal with a prosecuting attorney in your lifetime. Sometimes, mostly innocent people are “overcharged” for “crimes” in which there are extenuating circumstances. People are forced into guilty pleas all the time. It’s happened to me twice in my lifetime. One was a dry reckless driving charge and in the other I was falsely accused of something I didn’t do: there was an altercation, but the accusing party embellished the truth in order to hide his own guilt.

                On the reckless, I changed lanes and forced a car in my blind spot to get out of my way. Just a simple mistake. A cop saw it and was upset because he thought I was drunk, but I blew a zero. He then lied and said I nearly ran 4 cars off the freeway. The prosecuting attorney told me to plead guilty or he was going to come after me with everything in his arsenal. I told him I wouldn’t plead guilty to something I didn’t do. He threatened to add more charges and put my “ass” in jail. I had a wife and 4 young kids at the time. I went to an attorney, and he told me that this prosecutor was a huge “jerk”, and that it would cost me a lot of money and I’d still probably go to jail. The attorney said a jury would believe the cop and not me. I weighed my options, and I went with the guilty plea. $2000 fine and 2 years unsupervised probation.

                Years later, I was attacked by a neighbor. There were no witnesses. He lied about the whole thing when the police got there. We were both charged with assault. The prosecuting attorney believed him for some reason. This guy had the cops at his house for fighting with his wife all the time, and yet the prosecutor did not believe me. The only thing on my record was the reckless from 15 years earlier. The prosecutor dropped the charges on the other guy and filed charges against me. He also gave me a list of other charges he’d follow up with if I didn’t plead guilty. I hired an attorney, and he convinced me that you never know what a jury will believe, so he told me to save a lot of time and money and plead guilty. My wife and kids were really scared. I didn’t want this to ruin my life, so I capitulated. Mostly, I cared more about my family than I did about the principle of the situation, so I pled guilty. $3000 in attorney fees, $1500 fine and 1 year informal probation.

                My point is that, unless you’ve been put in such a situation, you don’t really know what your response would be. It sounds to me like Flynn was railroaded and we probably don’t know the half of what he was threatened with. Prosecutors learn ways to make the accused plead out. They don’t like going to court, especially when there is shady stuff that investigators may have done.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Newhere says:

                This comment makes clear you have your own “facts” and are here just to troll. Sorry I wasted time responding to your comments.

                Like

        • 13wasylyna says:

          Because no one threatened their families

          Like

      • The Gipper Lives says:

        Other “Honest Mistakes”:

        Benedict Arnold’s Treason
        The Lincoln Assassination
        The Lindbergh Kidnapping
        Pearl Harbor
        The Invasion of Czechoslovakia
        The Cuban Missile Crisis
        The Watergate Break-In

        “Ooops!”

        Liked by 2 people

    • Newhere says:

      Exactly. What an utterly stupid and insulting debate. Imagine if Fox or any network held segments on the 9/11 hijackers framed as “honest mistake” or “nefarious intent”? This is almost just that stupid (or assumes we are).

      Liked by 9 people

      • underwhelmingposter says:

        What does a “National Security Attorney” do. Is this one part of “Lawfare”?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Newhere says:

          I don’t know, but I looked him up, and he also commented today on how “freaked out” Lori Loughlin must be about Felicity Huffman’s sentence for the college admissions scandal. So there’s that.

          Like

        • dd_sc says:

          National Security Law is a field of study (like Tax Law, Contract Law) so that’s probably his specialty.

          Like

        • John Obidienzo says:

          I’m Suspicious about Moss’s ameliorating statement that a grand jury may not be convinced about McCabe’s intent to lie because it actually helped Trump and not Clinton. It sleeves cozily into the Bromwich letter to the DOJ, which is itself a leak about the existence of a grand jury.

          The lie, then admission about leaking the existence of the Weiner lap top with Clinton’s emails on it is a misdirection of intent. McCabe and Peter Strzok had no plans to investigate the lap top before the election–an effort to help Clinton–something they were doing all along.

          The result of the leak to WSJ, helping Trump and hurting Clinton, is not relevant to their intent, but rather a by product of the actual intent of the small group, which was to c-y-a their intention to hide the discovery of the emails on the lap top–which was about to or going to be exposed. The leak to the WSJ was to get in front of their own obstruction being revealed.

          Like

        • farrier105 says:

          A “National Security Lawyer” is frequently called upon by agencies like the CIA. There are statutes regulating covert operations, for example, that Sundance touched upon in his “Benghazi Brief,” which he recently reprinted. Sundance pointed out how “Operation Zero Footprint” to arm Libyan rebels in 2010-2012 was legal. A “National Security Lawyer” would advise about such things as they are being planned, and provide defense if something goes sideways.

          Like

    • mopar2016 says:

      Spying on the new president was for his own good. Sure it was.
      They were only trying save the new administration from Russia Russia Russia.

      Like

    • Pyrthroes says:

      Quite right. When it comes to these slithering mug-a-loons, the only “honest mistake” would be for a naive public to credit a syllable any of ’em say.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Pale rider says:

      First few words of Yoo I realized he’s talking to us in a condescending way. He knows the truth, he knows what we don’t but he says” ‘finally’ we get the truth”. We? No us, and pretty sure it’s another ‘partial truth’. It’s all theater folks. One more interview, one more talking head, one more hearing, another head fake.
      Remember Timothy McVey? Boom he’s dead. The trial wasn’t even televised. Point is when things need to be done, they can get it done, they just don’t want to.

      Like

    • Bendix says:

      This reminds me of an old Steve Martin routine, on how to get a million dollars and not pay any taxes.
      He said first you get a million dollars, then you don’t pay any taxes, and when you go on trial you tell the judge, “Well EXCUUUSE ME!”
      It was funny, because it was so ludicrous, just flat-out ridiculous and stupid.

      Now we are seeing it attempted in real life. Why don’t they just get Steve Martin to be their spokesman?

      Like

    • Occasional Commenter says:

      What happened to the notion that ignorance of the law is no excuse?

      Like

    • farrier105 says:

      Beware the claim of “Exigent Circumstances.” It gets used all the time.

      Like

  2. huecowacko says:

    McCabe will be off the hook and compensated nicely by the Court, now that’s DC justice.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. A2 says:

    I think both men laid out the two positions and thus the heart of the matter as it goes forward.

    Simplistic as it was just a brief interview, but salient nonetheless.

    Not making a judgment call as that is for others who know more about all this than you or I.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Tl Howard says:

      Except there’s all kinds of evidence that it was a frame-up and not a mistake.

      Liked by 3 people

    • underwhelmingposter says:

      Salient?????

      Liked by 1 person

      • A2 says:

        Yes. Salient. Both laid out potential scenarios going forward. It was informative as to what may happen going forward. Educated guesses, but guesses nonetheless.

        As for the poster above you saying there is lots of evidence it was a frame up, on what I know that is entirely probable if not provably possible. However, it has to be proved in a court of Law. Pray that the Justice department, now recommending charges and indictment have an ironclad evidentiary case. I believe so, but that is meaningless. The prof is in the pudding.

        Words are a torrent in the Internet age, but actions speak louder than words.

        Liked by 2 people

        • LULU says:

          And Lawfare is everywhere… or certainly can be.

          Liked by 1 person

        • 🍺Gunny66 says:

          Another aspect of this, which Sundance has mentioned on a few occasions.

          Pence fired Gen Flynn for supposed lying to him.

          When the entire issue was caused by Pence by not being prepared for a MSM interview, insinuating Flynn was guilty on national TV.
          Pence ended up just basically “babbling” on National TV.

          Flynn covered for Pence by not “disagreeing” with him.

          Does anyone ever wonder why Pence “rarely” gives interviews? But he is always in the photo ops?

          Flynn took one for the team. To not embarrass Pence or the administration.

          And still he will not say Pence was wrong. Even though Pence’s stupidly got Flynn in this mess in the first place.

          Some would call it loyalty.

          Just saying

          Liked by 7 people

  4. jx says:

    McCabe was referred for more than a “1001 charge”, Moss.

    18 U.S.C. § 242 – deprivation of rights under color of law
    18 U.S.C. § 1001 – concealment, false representations
    18 U.S.C. §§ 1505, 1515(b) – obstruction – making false or misleading statements, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information
    18 U.S.C. § 1621 – perjury

    https://gosar.house.gov/uploadedfiles/criminal-referral.pdf

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Kent says:

    President Trump promised a few years ago to declassify all the documents, which, if he done that, would have exposed much more of the criminality of McCabe. It should have been well before the last election as promised. It takes time for the legal system to process crimes. Especially involving Democrats and their friends in the bureaucracy. Trump’s failure to give the public access to the full truth of what occurred, with every document published and every bureaucrat held accountable for what they did with their time and their arsenal of federal power, has allowed the coup plotters to pretty much escape any punishment. At the same time Republicans like Mike Flynn who did nothing wrong have been destroyed by the people that Trump is protecting. Is Paul Manafort still rotting in solitary?

    World War 2 was won in four years by Americans. Now, American justice cannot even indict traitors who tried to steal our government and our treasures and our freedom. And with a Republican President the entire criminal justice system is completely allergic to the idea of prosecuting any Democrats even while their happily continue their crimes against the people.

    Sad.

    Liked by 5 people

    • The Third Man says:

      HST: “The buck stops here.”

      Like

    • david Lubin says:

      I wonder if Trump had a strategy in mind in mind in holding onto the “goods” against these people. A political ax to hold over their heads. I cannot imagine any other motivation.

      Like

      • CNN_sucks says:

        My hunch. NO. PDJT is fighting the whole nefarious bureaucracy. The club was exclusively by fellow elitists/democrats travelers. The Clintons has started the ball and put all their allies permanently in the bureaucracy.

        Maybe PDJT by appointing judges a way can mitigate the corruption and two tiered justice system. Or else we are just waiting for the collapse and another civil war.

        Like

      • Jederman says:

        They appear completely unconcerned about his “holding onto the goods.”

        Like

    • underwhelmingposter says:

      PDJT is dealing with RINOs, Dems, and deep state bad actors. Every move he makes has landmines all around. Every benefit he has brought to the US of A has been by “work around” of all these landmines. Paul Ryan gave NO support. Mitch gives moderate support.Pelosi has said “Hell No!” to anything that would be good for the country (AKA now as PDJT). He is being impeached in method if not in actuality.
      I am supposing (so as not to assume) that his attorneys have recommended the action he took on the declassification. PDJT would have done it all himself. But IMO cooler minds prevailed.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Judith says:

        Correct. Declassification was a trap. Given the broad (and unconstitutional) powers of a counterintelligence investigation against our Commander in Chief ( ! ), the President was surrounded by liars. They were baiting him and waiting to charge him for obstructing their phony investigation the moment he tried to interfere.

        The TREASONOUS coup is ongoing. What is needed is a DOJ that does its job in uncovering the illegal underpinnings of this TREASONOUS coup. Problem is they now look complicit in these TREASONOUS acts. Not good!

        Liked by 3 people

        • YvonneMarie says:

          Agreed,
          But truth will eventually prevail.
          I hope to live to see that.

          Like

        • Kent says:

          What is needed is the truth. The only way to the truth is full declassification. In case you hadn’t noticed, the DOJ does not want the truth to come out. The only way it will come out is with an executive order compelling the declassification and the public posting of every single document. If you don’t want that, you don’t want the truth. And declassification was never a “trap”. It is the pathway to success. And we are sure not on a pathway to success now. Trump promised it. Now is the time for him to do what he said he would over and over. Give us the truth and we the people will make certain justice is delivered. But we need the full truth.

          Like

    • Brinton says:

      I believe the Mueller Investigation was a huge reason why Trump delayed declassifying everything. I think that logic was three fold. 1) I’m not sure Trump would of been successful declassifying while he was under Mueller’s investigation.. The DOJ, FBI, and IC were truly running rouge. Would they have followed his order to declassified? I don’t think so. 2) Possible Obstruction of Justice charges for ordering the declassification. They tried to paint him with obstruction for executing his constitutional powers already. 3) Declassifying after the Mueller Investigation has huge benefits I believe. Mueller’s report is done, They can’t change the record and cover up their conduct during the investigation. If everything does get declassified for the american people to see, I believe it will clearly demonstrate how corrupt they were. That will be devastating for the deep state and the Democrats.

      I hope we get there. Because If number 3 can be demonstrated, we might get to the truth. That Obama and the Dems had weaponized the IC to spy on their political enemies. That would damage the democrats for decades, and real change might happen in this country.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Brinton says:

        Additional Thought: I’m not sold on Barr as this white night riding in to dismantle the system. I don’t think he is to be honest. I believe he wants to save the institutions above all. But he has a choice, you cut the rot out or the patient dies. So hes to expose and remove this cancer that has infected everything. But he will only cut out as much as he has to, because the system has to remain I’m afraid. But stabilize the patient first, then reconstruction can begin.

        The timing of Barr’s conformation as the AG has been significant. The Mueller probe was shut down. That was the first step to stop the bleeding. Durum was installed to find out what had gone on. Barr openly stated during congressional hearing that he believed things had gone on regarding surveillance. All of these things are big developments. I know people are tired. But the clock didn’t start 3 years ago. It started less then 6 months ago with the appointment of Barr. It’s going to take time.

        Maybe I’m wrong. Don’t believe I am though. But I’m still frustrated, like everyone else.

        Liked by 6 people

      • Lester Smith says:

        Fat Jerry’s job is to keep this fake obstruction narrative alive. If Trump trys to declassify now he will be accused of obstructing a congressional investigation. This is the dems way to cover up the truth and to damage POTUS. The rinos and dems are evil SOBs.

        Like

      • Raptors2020 says:

        Dan Coats is gone. His assistant Susan Gordon left with him. Christopher Wray won’t release a thing. The Justice Department is frantic to protect the Comey Memos.

        There is a huge struggle going on behind closed doors to hide everything from us. Brinton, the Deep State is simply saying “No”. Trump versus Washington, from Inauguration Day, until now.

        Like

        • Brinton says:

          I agree with your conclusion. But Dan and Susan leaving are positive developments. The transfer of Declassification coordination from the DNI to Bill Barr was significant. Wray will be next to depart.. Probably this fall after IG report and declassification of documents related to it.

          We asked for a “Law and Order” President. We have one. Doing things the legal way takes time when it is an uphill battle. Sometimes a long time. People are upset about the speed of declassification, trade agreements, immigration, border wall, etc. I’ve always believed it would take trump 8 years to achieve all these things. 4 years to just get positioned to capitalize. We are 2 1/2 years in. You can actually now see how Trump has methodically positioned the pieces on the board to capitalize. Trump has to get reelected. That is up to us. I live in Maryland, so I’m going to help out in PA to make sure Trump gets Reelected.

          Like

          • Brinton says:

            Challange: Who here lives in a Democrat Blue State? If you do as I do, what are you going to do? Do people come here because it makes them feel good. Feeling good gets you squat. Who here will “walk the Walk”, or is it just all talk.

            I’ve chosen to do something. I’m 40 something years old. and it will be the first time I actually campaign for someone.

            Like

            • farrier105 says:

              Doing things the legal way takes time when it is an uphill battle.

              Mueller: 1.7 indictments every month for 22 months. So far, all indictments held up at trial. No, it doesn’t all happen at snail’s pace. The latest is Durham won’t be ready for another 6-to-12 months once grand jury starts. If that is so, the odds are we will be hearing bleats in here that we “better wait for the 2020 election,” like we had to “wait for the Mid-Terms,” which didn’t work out very well, did it?

              If the thing isn’t done by the time the conventions are over, and the candidates nominated, you WON’T see or hear anything until after the election. Better hope Trump wins. If he loses, the thing goes away. The public won’t get “educated about the criminal behaviors, which is more important than prosecutions.” Of course, no one will think the crimes are very important if NO ONE GETS PUNISHED FOR THEM, but that doesn’t matter much to some people, I guess.

              Like

    • thomaspsyche says:

      Trump’s investigation not completed. If released Wiseman et al would have declared obstruction. Trump wisely gave it to AG!

      Like

    • meow4me2 says:

      The difference is that in WW2 we had declared enemies. This time, they are undeclared quislings who know our system of law and how best to evade it. That makes a difference. You can shoot someone dead pretty fast in war. When your in a stealth war where you can’t shoot openly, it takes a lot longer.

      Like

    • meow4me2 says:

      The difference is that in WW2 we had declared enemies. This time, they are undeclared quislings who know our system of law and how best to evade it. That makes a difference. You can shoot someone dead pretty fast in war. When your in a stealth war where you can’t shoot openly, it takes a lot longer.

      Like

    • meow4me2 says:

      The difference is that in WW2 we had declared enemies. This time, they are undeclared quislings who know our system of law and how best to evade it. That makes a difference. You can shoot someone dead pretty fast in war. When your in a stealth war where you can’t shoot openly, it takes a lot longer.

      Like

  6. doofusdawg says:

    Don’t forget that Barr and Durham know everything. Barr knew when he first testified to congress regarding the release of the Mueller report and probably knew before he was even confirmed. If Barr can prove that the investigation of Trump started in the spring of 16 with Misfud or before then the “honest mistake” claim goes out the window. They can’t have it both ways.

    Liked by 6 people

    • American Nationalist says:

      There’s alot of information regarding this matter that picking at one string leads to another. As it regards the predicate of the investigation, there’s a very simple rule of the Court: With certain exceptions, hearsay and innuendo is impermissible. What goes for a Court trial, should go doubly for determining whether or not to investigate. The Papadopoulos sting(even if they accurately relayed it, which they didn’t as stated by Downer, Papadopoulos himself and Gowdy confirming the existence of tapes showing differently from the Muller affidavit in court. Yeah, that would be another practice they “honestly” violated ROFL.) is classic hearsay and innuendo. It’s unprovable and thus unreliable as a “Statement of Fact”. Even if one wanted to dig their head in the sand and call it an “honest mistake.”, the numerous and repeated “mistakes” of concealing information favorable to the defense and essentially going on a whim of hearsay is proof they shouldn’t be in charge of enforcing the law on the rest of US.

      Liked by 1 person

      • doofusdawg says:

        Sydney is trying to show that Flynn was actually targeted well before his conversation with the Russian ambassador. There is a fine line between egregious prosecutorial misconduct and criminal political corruption and weaponizing the agencies of government against political opponents… or not. And when she links the motives and actions of going after Flynn and going after Trump the line will disappear all together.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Raptors2020 says:

          Flynn was targeted by Stefan Halper in 2014. Flynn was seated at a British dinner next to a British academic with a Russian name: Svetlana Lokhova. Halper then started the rumor Flynn and Lokhova were having an affair.

          Lokhova was apparently an unwitting stooge (she may also be another Carter Page); she is suing Halper. Halper’s defence? He was a government employee, just following orders.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Doppler says:

      “They can’t have it both ways.” What about compartmentalizations information. Wait till the prosecutions start and the individual players claim they weren’t aware of what others knew.

      Like

    • farrier105 says:

      If they know everything they have evidence of everything. If they have the evidence, they have probable cause. If they have probable cause they get easy indictments.

      Where are the indictments since you wrote:”…Barr and Durham KNOW everything.”? Know is present tense. The investigation must be completed for them to KNOW everything. Are you sure you didn’t mean “Barr and Durham WILL know everything once the investigation is complete”?

      Like

  7. mopar2016 says:

    I always knew that our government was corrupt, but it’s waaaaaay worse than I ever thought.
    Looks like the US government is nothing more than a corrupt joke from top to bottom.

    Liked by 9 people

    • The Third Man says:

      The permanently corrupt D.C. swamp is awash in trillions of $$$ of bribe money i.e. campaign & foundation contributions. In addition, there are hookers, junkets, arkancides, blackmails… No country on planet Earth even remotely comes close.
      But have heart: “Pigs dine, hogs are slaughtered.”

      Liked by 3 people

    • Greeneghis Khan says:

      This is why they are pushing for gun control Beto Style

      Liked by 1 person

    • amwick says:

      That is truly inspiring… but I am thinking about what A2 said, actions speak louder than words. In this day and age, how do you “fight” a government? It is too powerful, in part because Congress is a Career. (many times) People btch and moan, but the idea of term limits is a lead balloon…. We all know how wealthy the congress critters become, we all know to follow the $$$$ but, here again, knowledge and action are miles apart.
      Fight the government????????? I can’t even kick it in the shins… At least Sd is fighting, he is shining light on the slime… Ok, that is a start.. hmmmmm eyeore moment over.

      Like

    • Do I get put on a special list when I upvoted Hamilton’s words. Will Andrew Cuomo’s brownshirts be breaking in tonight?

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Nigella says:

    Nothing honest about them

    Like

  9. mtk says:

    National security attorney Bradley Moss and former assistant attorney general John Yoo…

    Two ‘Alphabet Soup Titles of Station…. That wrap around the Swamp’s gamed system to represent differing affinities and thus like mindedness.

    Either it is about creating plausible reasonableness, or they are about creating contrasts to act through for whatever party holds the Baton.

    Which sound familiar within the uniParty BS of GOP takes it in the shorts and the Dems can do no wrong.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Pa Hermit says:

    Flynn was almost forced to plead guilty, as the SOB Mueller used Mike’s son for leverage. A really underhanded move that should not escape the light of day! Ya gotta believe Karma will come into play somewhere down the line! What goes around, comes around!

    Liked by 4 people

  11. Ray Runge says:

    McCabe is being charged for lying to investigators about a leak in regard the HRC investigation.

    Without the context of the true criminal being brought to justice, that is HRC, then McCabe’s leak does become a nothing burger. The true criminal is HRC and the numerous DoJ and FBI people who covered for her numerous crimes.

    McCabe is a lying creep but wn the context of all the real criminals not being charged then McCabe does become a small potatoes guy in this particular drama.

    Liked by 3 people

    • WRB says:

      Perhaps it is too early to call McCabe “small potatoes,” as the pending IG report may indicate otherwise.

      Like

      • DJ says:

        I’m actually going to agree with Rooster Head on the other thread and be prepared for the IG FISA report to be a letdown. I’m willing to bet there won’t be more than a nugget or two that Sundance hasn’t already revealed on these pages.

        Like

  12. Dutchman says:

    The “honest mistake” or as I prefer to call it, the “Stupid but not criminal” defence is one of about six defences available TO the defence councils, and they are NOT limited to just one.

    The ‘stupid but not criminal’ defence HAS been used succesfully before, although its by no means guaranteed.

    On the plus side, some jurors may ‘buy’ it, because the defendant is swallowing his pride, in admiting he was basically an idiot, and jurors MAY think that gives it credibility. Until they remember the,defendant is looking at a choice;
    Public embarassment (I’m an Idiot!) vs. prison time.

    And of coarse if the prosecution can present enough admissable evidence to in effect say “C’mon, man! Nobody is,THAT stupid!,…or to present CLEAR evidence of nefarious intent. Attempts to CONCEAL the evidence, after the fact are, for instance evidence of nefarious intent.

    Really, these charges or not charges against McCabe for leaking and lieing are small potatoes, even though more broadly leaking and lieing is most of what the coup is all about.

    Is this a distraction? To get everybody focused on this b.s., and distract us from the bigger picture?

    Like

    • Jederman says:

      Ok, “stupid mistake” + “lack of intent” + Dem/DS poodle = free pass, sign a book deal or be hired by CNN. Perps option.

      Like

      • ARW says:

        CNN gig was done to provide him a salary and a media pulpit from which to defend himself.

        Like

      • Dutchman says:

        As I said, this is only ONE of about 6 defences they can use. Unless charged with Conspiracy, they have the often used “SOG defence”; Some Other Guy. It wasn’t ME! ( says McCabe) it was COMEY!. Creates reasonable doubt, for the jury trying McCabe. So, he is found not guilty. Cameys trial, he says “It wasn’t ME, it was McCabe!” Again, jury isn’t charged with figuring out whether it was McCabe or,Comey, THIS jury is just charged with finding if Comey was shown by the evidence ti be guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt.and, if ONE juror is persuaded that it COULD have been McCabe, Comey walks.
        Charging both (or ALL) is a way to avoid this.
        Then there are the two ” Politics” defences. One, “hey, its just POLITICS, both sides do it. Particularly if Jury members are Orange man bad types, it could persuade. Sure, BOTH sides do it, after all “Trump” colluded with Russians, for cripes sake!”
        Or, the this is a POLITICAL prosecution, banana republic winner prosecuting loser defence argument.
        And then there is the “what would you have us do?” Justification defence; we had information we couldn’t disprove, that a Candidate for POTUS was an agent of Russia.

        We HAD to do whatever we could to protect the country.

        Said before, from a stricktly prefer to WIN, if I had to choose I would rather argue the Defence case, than the Prosecution, any day of the week.
        Its a much easier case to argue. Sad, but true.

        Like

    • Bendix says:

      Stupid works sometimes and sometimes it’s true.
      When someone has expertise and experience and training, there is no excuse for stupid.
      That’s willful stupidity.

      Like

      • Dutchman says:

        Yeah, depending on the facts and admissable evidence, the defence CAN work, or be effectively rebutted.
        Its A defence that can and has been used. Only has to persuade ONE juror.

        Like

    • Raptors2020 says:

      Exactly, Dutchman. FISA abuse was not THE Conspiracy. FISA abuse proves the conspiracy. Why were so many powerful people (Yates, Comey, Rosenstein etc.) willing to sign off on a bogus FISA warrant application? They viewed it as trivial, small potatoes.

      We keep going down blind alleys to dead ends. When Horowitz releases his report, we’ll be spending weeks and weeks debating which bureaucrat to charge for which petty offence. The Coup plotters will be roaring with laughter.

      Like

      • Dutchman says:

        And, if we continue down that road, we won’t come near to naming and shaming, let alone prosecuting the real perps, who ORDERED the coup.

        Truthfully, all these perps are peons, truthfully ‘just vollowink orders’. Obama and Hillary, sure. But the gang of 7, thru SSIC, was ALL IN on Benghazi, AND the coverup.
        ALL IN on Fast and Furious,..
        And the coverup.
        ALL IN on Lois Lerner,..
        And the coverup.
        All in on MYE to exonerate Hillary,
        Coverup of emails.
        ALL IN on Crossfire Hurricane
        And the coverup.
        ALL IN on Mueller,..
        And the Obstructiin trap.

        ALL IN on the coup, in other words.
        McConnell, Ryan, McCain, Graham Burr, Thune, Grassley were all in on ‘weoponising’and ‘politicising’the NSA database, from 2012 on.

        They HAD to be. When Rooster chaired those hearings on Lerner and Hillary that went NO where, he was following orders given to him by McConnell.
        There simply is no other explanation.
        The coverup of Wolfe, of Awan, and DWS, HAD to have had the,aquiesance of McConnell and,Ryan. Simply no other credible explanation.

        Like

        • Ma McGriz says:

          You tryin’ to get me banned fer cussin’?? ; )

          Like

          • Dutchman says:

            No, but a LITTLE cussin won’t get you BANNED, maybe put in moderation for awhile. Its kinda like a ‘penalty box’ where your posts go, and wait for adrem to read and clear.

            Having read a # of your comments, I think its highly unlikely you would post anything that would get you ‘banned’.

            Like

            • Ma McGriz says:

              lol….copy that.
              I can curse in four different languages and the term cuss a blue streak was probably inspired by someone with a mouth like mine.

              Like

              • Dutchman says:

                Got me beat, I only got English, Spanish and Croatian, lol.
                And, yeah, I can let lose pretty good on occasion. I TRY to restrain it, depending on who’s around, and comfort myself the bible doesn’t say “thou shalt not CUSS”.
                It says take the Lords name in vain.

                Like

                • Ma McGriz says:

                  True, it’s not one of the Ten Commandments, but both Old and New Testament Scripture does tell us not to use foul language, so I do try to repent …but I sure do have to ask often and early for forgiveness lol….
                  But Our Father only tells us that because He invented cursing, and knows what it can lead to. He knows all about Righteous Indignation and why sometimes we’ve just gotta cut loose and let ‘er fly.

                  That’s why He blessed this Nation with Founding Fathers who knew all about that stuff and so wisely furnished us with the Constitution and its ever-more precious 1st and 2nd Amendments.

                  There’s a time and a place for everything.
                  And there’s something to be said for the totally disarming effect it can have on a bully or a fool when a woman busts out the command voice in a stream of ebonically-laced rapid-fire questions at a steadily increasing decibel level. : )

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  Works pretty good for us guys, in similar situations. Gotta get their attention, sometimes, and let them know they picked the wrong person to try to victimise.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Ma McGriz says:

                  I can also whistle through my teeth. Real loud. lol
                  It’s actually a very useful skill that I use fairly often. And I’ve got a wolf-whistle that’ll turn heads from a block away. lol
                  I hear you about getting peoples’ attention when necessary.
                  I don’t do victim.

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  Yeah, a LONG LONG time ago, when I was young and dumb, I used to DO victims, but never ‘played’ the victim.
                  I used to be able to whistle, till I lost my teeth.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Ma McGriz says:

                  So you done straightened up and flied rite, but you can’t whistle any more.
                  Dude, there’s a song lyric there…..

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  Well, wouldn’t go back to being able to whistle, if it meant being crooked as a dogs hind leg, fer nothing.
                  I like “Ain’t it funny how falling,
                  Seems just like flying,…

                  Right up to the END!

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Ma McGriz says:

                  It’s good when we learn to sense the difference in gravity and flight.
                  It helps us avoid wile e. coyote syndrome.

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  Yup. Had a flat side to my face, for years, as it took me awhile, to learn the difference, lol.

                  Like

  13. Carrie says:

    And Bradley Moss chose to wear a purple tie today? Coincidence?
    I actually think Yoo was simply trying to appear professional when he gave the 2 options. But when he heard how biased Bradley Moss was, he then stated his opinion more strongly about why McCabe needs to be charged.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Rynn69 says:

    PREDICATE WAS NEFARIOUS AND THE INSURANCE POLICY. Case closed.

    If this is not found, there is no truth. There is no justice. There is no America.

    The DOJ/FBI/Obama admin/CIA had zero legitimate predicate to spy on Trump and open a counter-intelligence investigation. End of story.

    Note to the Swamp – you are not going to be able to BS your way out of this with anything less than the above. Nobody will buy it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • DJ says:

      “Nobody will buy it.”
      ———————————————-
      Actually, I think at least half the country will buy it. Just listen to what that half of the country thinks about “Orange Man Bad”.

      Liked by 2 people

  15. Rynn69 says:

    As an aside, I’d like someone to wipe that smarmy grin off of the Moss guy’s face. See – this is what America sees when they look at these former/current DOJ/FBI/CIA officials. Snarky, nasty people that have no business being in charge of anything d/t hubris that is off the charts and has lead to abuse of power, abuse of the law, and abuse of American citizens’ rights.

    In addition…ah – no – Flynn and Papadopolous plead the way they did under DURESS and COERCION and threats against their families. Big difference, Moss, but keep spinning away…

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Austin Holdout says:

    Put the same pressure on McCabe that was put on General Flynn and then talk about the cases being different because Flynn pled guilty. Total false equivalence.

    If a grand jury hasn’t decided not to indict yet, then all of these Lawfare clowns should not be out poisoning the well with all of their leaking and “rumors” that were 100% started by themselves. These people are shameless.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. CTH Fan says:

    Everybody is falling into a McCabe trap. By leaking info, once again, that he may be indicted before a public announcement by the AG, he and his lawyers are enlisting the help of the crooked MSM to muddy the waters ahead of time.

    Already his lawyers and MSM are laying out his defense, albeit potential lies, and the Justice Department is unable to publically (sp) rebut their claims. They have already tainted any jury because it is hard to miss the constant barrage of the “Poor McCabe” coverage.

    This is such a disgusting display of arrogant behavior. I do hope AG Barr and DAG Rosen have a way of handling this. Perhaps use this circus as a reason to change the location of the grand jury and if indicted, his trial. Away from DC.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. chojun says:

    I have a feeling that many at the FBI and DOJ will get off on disciplinary action alone.

    I feel the reason for this is that Brennan, via the EC which originated the entire investigation, attempted to manipulate the outcome. When viewed from a particular perspective, I believe that Strzok and Page seemed to be suffering confirmation bias in their efforts. I don’t think it was until the “insurance policy” when they began to realize that they could be in legal jeopardy, which is derived from the FBI contractors performing illegal political surveillance on the Trump campaign and the subsequent attempt to retroactively legalize it via the FISA process.

    Like

  19. GemStone says:

    It doesn’t matter!! A crime is a crime! What if I took knife and stabbed someone, but I didn’t want to kill them. Should I get off because I had no criminal intent to murder?

    Liked by 1 person

    • John says:

      Similar to Seth Rich?
      In DC, “It depends on what the definition of “crime” is.”

      Like

    • Raptors2020 says:

      Murder is a malum in se crime. Intrinsically wrong.

      We’re in the Alice in Wonderland world of the bureaucrats. Papadopoulos went to jail for telling the FBI he first met Mifsud in March, 2016 and it was April. Or the other way around.

      That’s the world we’re inhabiting if we start charging bureaucrats for technical violations. But the true reason Flynn and Papad were framed was they were seen (presented) as Russian spies and secret agents: a huge crime.

      We need a malum in se crime to charge these rats or they will win. I say charge Sedition, though the roof cave in.

      Like

  20. k4jjj says:

    A constitutional nation actually trying to survive would have already hanged these people. Even Hillary expected they would all “hang from nooses.” This is not like a warning ticket by a state trooper to slow down. A country that cannot severely punish treason and sedition cannot survive. We live in a world without consequences for the worst conduct. Quickly execute anarchists or expect anarchy. Even Abraham Lincoln ordered traitors be hanged.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. I want to see if IG Horowitz piles on with McCabe referrals in the FISA Report. Directing the Pientka-Ohr dossier channel could be interpreted (by me) as witness tampering or falsifying evidence. An IG would say it “violated policies” and the DOJ would say “declined to prosecute.”

    Like

  22. mg says:

    Voters need to shut this country down. We know the names know is the time for tar and feathers. This will never end the way we want until we take the bull by the horns and fix this disastrous govt. takeover.

    Like

  23. TexasDude says:

    You have to take the totality of the circumstances in a criminal matter, especially when there are conflicting statements, excuses, and reasoning.

    Good faith means you are acting in a reasoable belief that something nefarious occurred and you are just doing you due diligence in you official capacity no matter if the reality turns out differently than you thought.

    Thing is, I do not see anything that can rise to such a defense. Nothing.

    A defense to this is that it was purely a counter intelligence operation with Trump and/or his associates and campaign staff were controlled or influenced by Russia.

    Nothing so far comes close to giving such a supposition foundation. Everything screams official abuse of authority and other federal criminality by federal law enforcement, the intelligence agencies, and Obama’s administration.

    Now, and what I cynically expected, is that the latest report’s expectations should be tempered adds more evidence to the totality.

    There is good reason why my faith is nonexistent.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dave Hunter says:

      Exactly right. The feds ran lures (per Strzok’s text to Page) at GPop and Page, and possibly at Flynn, and so they cannot now claim they actually thought there was Russian influence on the Trump campaign. Further, the normal course of business is to give the campaign a defensive briefing against the foreign intelligence influence, which was not done.

      What gets me about this is that the feds are very good at bringing people in for an interview, threatening to charge them to the hilt, thereby squeezing them and obtaining confessions of conspiracy. They’re doing nothing like that here. Mind boggling evidence of the deep state protecting their own, IMHO.

      Like

  24. Dave Hunter says:

    The fact that McCabe was AUTHORIZED to speak to the media doesn’t mitigate the fact that he LIED TO INVESTIGATORS FOUR TIMES! Flynn was authorized as the named future National Security Advisor to speak to the Russians! That didn’t stop McCabe from sending Strzok and Pientka to interview him, nor did it stop the SC from charging him with lying. McCabe’s lawyers can’t use that argument, IMHO.

    If the grand jury returns no indictment then Jessie Liu needs to be fired. This is an open and shut case and if her minions can’t go into court and get an indictment it’s because they’re purposely tanking the case.

    Like

  25. Bogeyfree says:

    All you need to know is they ignored the DNC Server and just accepted a 3rd party’s redacted, written letter of their findings, saying it was the Russians who hacked the server and feed the emails to Wikileaks.

    A critical piece of hard evidence ignored IMO! Did they ever speak with Assange or the other folks named by Butowsky who he says may know how the emails got to Wikileaks?

    It would be like a bank robbery investigation where the robber left his gun the the investigators don’t take it to check for fingerprints and don’t question the hostages.

    Who does that??

    This is just one example why so many IMO don’t trust our government!

    Liked by 2 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      The tip of the iceberg with the deception, lies and corruption. See also: Brady violations of exculpatory evidence in Sidney Powell’s letter. Particularly frustrating, how does the FBI simply lose their original 302 paperwork? Such transparent b.s.

      Liked by 1 person

  26. ilcon says:

    Flynn did NOT commit a crime, period.
    The Feds have a 90 some percent win rate, why is that?
    The government is 100% corrupt.

    Like

  27. ilcon says:

    In his own words.

    Like

  28. ilcon says:

    Russia meddling in our elections is a DC fairy tale.

    Ted Kennedy and Killary ACTIVELY enlisted their help.

    DC is a cesspool of lies and deceit.

    Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      Russia may have “meddled” but it was insignificant and inconsequential.

      OTOH, China has been buying our Congress and getting policies that are financially lucrative for China while being disastrous for working, tax-paying Americans. There’s no reason to believe some of that $$$$$$ wasn’t behind the attempted coup.

      Like

  29. youme says:

    Ex-FBI Director Comey Explains How He Took Advantage of Fledgling Trump Administration

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/ex-fbi-director-comey-explains-how-he-took-advantage-fledgling-trump

    Like

  30. scrap1ron says:

    Some “honest” mistakes are more equal than others.

    Like

  31. This is so sickening! So now it appears that “intent” is the legal savior for all these corrupt bastards in our banana republic. Just like Hillary Clinton…. they will use that same justification to escape justice.
    Maybe everybody currently in prison should petition the court to have their verdict overturned on the grounds they did not intend to break the law.
    This is a bunch of underhanded elitist bullsh:t!!!

    Like

  32. JBrickley says:

    What is all this B.S. about “intent”? That’s how they let Hillary get away with it. Nobody gets off because they didn’t really intend to commit a crime. You do the crime you are arrested and convicted. Doesn’t matter if you don’t know the law either.

    Like

  33. JBrickley says:

    What is all this B.S. about “intent”? That’s how they let Hillary get away with it. Nobody gets off because they didn’t really intend to commit a crime. You do the crime you are arrested and convicted. Doesn’t matter if you don’t know the law either.

    Like

  34. Johnny says:

    There are certian elements of our seditious government that fear the Tree house knowledge that has been accumalated .

    Have no doubts that there are posters on here that are lawfare plants. By changing little words they attempt everyday to change your thought process. That is Pysops. If they keep repeating the little words, soon they can contaminate the knowledge pool the tree house is famous for.

    What has Sydney told us over and over. These people wield the power of our Government to wreck lives when THEY want to. We elected President Trump, but they did not want him.
    So enter the seditious coup group to have him thrown out.

    Anything that is spouted by so called lawyers posting on here is reason enough to be wary.
    It is a narrative shaping attempt. This site is being hammered everyday by them. They need to change your mind and try and cloud the truth. Saying feelings has nothing to do with it is a phsyop game.

    Like

    • Zippy says:

      “There are certian elements of our seditious government that fear the Tree house knowledge that has been accumalated.”

      Oh, come on. There have been entire books laying out in great detail the entire Spygate scandal, but what, perhaps a low single digit percentage of Americans know the scandal to that detail if that?

      The deep state knows it would take a public groundswell demanding justice for justice to actually happen and that is not going to happen. Slow-walking to bore to death those rare few who are following the scandal by, for instance, taking a year to do an investigation of Comey that Judicial Watch says should have taken a few months also helps.

      With the chain of investigative books and material found here, any proper investigation if they actually WANTED to conduct one could be over in short order by following the already laid out chain and asking just a few right questions.

      HEADLINE: Joseph Mifsud testifies that he was sent by western intelligence, thereby destroying from the ground up the entire basis of the Russian collusion scandal!

      John Solomon said several weeks ago that he was told by Mifsud’s lawyer that Mifsud was willing to testify to that. So, where’s the headline that would OBLITERATE the entire deep state/Dem position and get this endless, slow-walked CRAP over with? Nowhere, because that would entirely defeat the slow-walking strategy.

      Like

      • Johnny says:

        Zippy
        I agree 100 percent with you.
        I think you misunderstood me. They are slow walking, getting lawyer’s to speak out both sides of their mouths on here. All they spout is opinions to poison our thoughts.

        This sedition has got to go to trial, and
        We the people decide what the truth is.

        What they fear is the courtroom, and they are trying to stop it from getting to the jurors.

        Lawyers give legal opinions. Juries decide truth

        Like

  35. John says:

    This has become such a Sham! There needs to be a major “Game Changer”! (via GOD or POTUS). The “swamp” is taking control and running down the clock. Justice can never be found in a demonic system full of evil people!

    Like

    • Zippy says:

      “The “swamp” is taking control and running down the clock.”

      Here’s my common sense estimate of the extent of “the swamp”: All pols, bureaucrats, and lobbyists at all levels of government who would fight tool and nail any attempt to eliminate their job or reduce their power and influence even if it was in the best interests of the nation. What’s that, at least 80%?

      So, you are ruled not so much by the people you elect, you are actually ruled by unelected bureaucrats and lobbyists. It has been that way for a very long time.

      Like

      • John says:

        They are known as the “SES” (Senior Executive Service), and were established under Jimmy Carter. They call themselves “Generals,” have their own flag, cannot be fired, and have their own union controlled by Great Britten (SERCO).

        Like

  36. islandpalmtrees says:

    McCabe released information to the MSM, anonymously. When he could have called a press conference and officially released his comments. Then he lied about it.

    So don’t tell me about Intent or Honest Mistake!

    Add to this that McCabe and his conspirator friends from the FBI & DOJ showed no concern or forgiveness to people like Flynn and Page.

    Only one conclusion is possible, prosecute McCabe to the fullest extent of the LAW.

    Like

  37. k4jjj says:

    The media are active participants in the coup. Flynn’s legal fees are destroying him. McCabe gets fired, gets a book deal and gets hired by CNN and is probably receiving a nice stipend plus some heavyweight legal help. A lot of rich and powerful people don’t want McCabe to turn on them and are willing to pay dearly for that. High stakes.

    There are no ethics in this war. The Left is organized crime and playing for keeps. The mob protects its “made” men.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. Koot Katmando says:

    The smirky and smug Bradley Moss comments about Gen Flynn and Papa choosing to plead guilty is astonishing. The DOJ squeezed Flynn and others hard by threatening family like mobsters. Moss knows the full power of the DOJ and the plotters was used against the Trump team – and that the DOJ is out to help protect those that were on the inside like McCabe, Comey. He sees what is going on and how again – just like with the Clinton investigation – the FISA investigation will be all for show with no real effort to find a crime – on the contrary to cover up the crime.

    Liked by 3 people

  39. John-Y128 says:

    Maybe CTH could ‘limit’ the amounts of user postings per article so I would have to scroll 30 pages of A2’s liberal ranting!

    Like

  40. Elaine Keller says:

    As if Bradley Moss doesn’t know the process is the punishment.

    Like

  41. Elaine Keller says:

    As if Bradley Moss doesn’t know the process is the punishment.

    Like

  42. Elaine Keller says:

    As if Bradley Moss doesn’t know the process is the punishment.

    Like

  43. Midnite says:

    A quick Google search makes me an instant expert on “intent”, so I feel fully qualified to make the following statements…/sarc. In Flynn’s case there was no intent to break the law concerning FARA, as he hired a lawyer who specializes in such matters to advise and help file the extraordinarily complex documents created specifically for him. The cost of that legal advice was the princely sum of $170,000…personally I would call that due diligence.

    In my mind one could show specific criminal intent on the part of the Gov. in crafting the document in such a way as to build in a perjury trap, so that once it was signed it became evidence of a crime. Proving that specific criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt seems nearly impossible without some written statement to the affect that “we’re gonna screw Flynn and this is how”. It might be easier to prove general intent to entrap or ensnare Flynn via the content and context of conversations surrounding the discussions about drafting his FARA documents.

    In McCabe’s instance he’s going to try and use “intent” in the same way Loretta Lynch did with HRC. In other words prove my state of mind at the time to commit a crime ie. intent and I’ll show you how that doesn’t apply…I was crazy, under duress or just doing my job as a patriotic american and protecting the institution I love. Personally I think McCabe is in a world of hurt, first for his actions concerning the media leak, second for trying to cover-up those deeds and third for lying about them. I’d say this is just the start of his legal troubles because there’s so much more that he’s done in his short tenure at FBI headquarters. If I were him I’d stick with crazy, because super patriot is only going to get you so far, but “crazy’ hell that one’s good forever.

    Liked by 3 people

  44. jbowen82 says:

    As I’ve posted before, there were hundreds of people involved in the domestic surveillance operation against the Trump campaign, then the transition, then the White House itself: agents, analysts, technicians, supervisors, clerical and support staff. I put them in four groups:

    1. The true conspirators, who knew the story they were peddling was false, but were doing it for political reasons.
    2. The gullible, who believed the story was true, in most cases because they were Democrats predisposed to believe it.
    3. The overly trusting, who didn’t know whether it was true or not, but believed their chain of command.
    4. The careerists, who knew it probably wasn’t true, but went along because Hillary was going to win and there was a potential up side to being “on the team” and a big potential down side if you made waves.

    All of them knew exactly what they were doing, and I include some of the FISA judges and some in their chambers, who had to know they had been presented a bogus application. Just read the damn dossier – it’s preposterous. All of them are guilty. “Just following orders” quit being a valid excuse many years ago.

    Liked by 2 people

  45. mtk says:

    So it is coming down to a grand jury.

    Hah, can you just imagine the actions of the Govt within the grand jury presentation if the stalling corrupt actions outside the grand jury are any indication.
    What a farce!

    Liked by 1 person

  46. rjones99 says:

    Infuriating that either of these people would use their voice, their moral authority, their knowledge and skill to do anything other than condemn garbage like McCabe is just risible.

    Sundance has won the war against the other investigators if this is where all this is headed. The only value in knowing the truth is using it to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

    These cool talking heads and analysts are helping to ensure that doesn’t happen. They are as complicit as all the traitors committing the crimes.

    Liked by 2 people

  47. Harlan says:

    Yoo…”Was it an honest mistake by the fbi, or was something more nefarious at word?”

    Come on. Really? Who doesn’t know at this point that the entire campaign to oust President Trump was nefarious from the outset? Unless one doesn’t consider treason “nefarious”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • DeWalt says:

      Next you’ll be told Trump was a willing participant to smoke out the Russians.

      Like

    • PageMarker says:

      “First we fu*k Flynn, then we fu*c Trump.”

      Lt. Gen. Flynn is a counter-intelligence expert. ‘They’ thought they were screwing him over, he played the long game giving them enough rope to hang themselves. Deep State has been committing crimes so long they thought they were the law. Sessions appoints Rosenstein who oversees the Mueller ‘coverup’ of 30 years of corruption. Game just started, and the joke is on them. Lots of rope…

      Like

  48. For Eyes says:

    “To speak of atrocious crime in mild language is treason to virtue.” – Edmund Burke

    Liked by 2 people

  49. DeWalt says:

    Another made for tv drama. Stay tune for the shocking next episode. This is the product of reality TV production. Behind the scenes the actors are all friends. Americans love their entertainment. What a Fing joke.

    Like

    • jbowen82 says:

      I don’t disagree completely. I just think (h/t Michael Berry) that the star of “The Apprentice” is also the star of this reality show. Season 1 started with the escalator ride and ended on Election Night 2016. The Season 2 finale was the Kavanaugh confirmation vote. We’re in Season 3 now, which I think ends with a China deal. In the big picture where Presidents operate, having justice done to the seditious conspirators may not even make the Top 10 list. We might see cameo appearances from Brennan and Comey in orange jumpsuits, but I think this story just proceeds at its own pace to its own conclusion. It’s a DOJ matter to be handled by Barr, no longer part of the show.

      Liked by 1 person

  50. This will be their “Out”… their “The definition of ‘’Is’ is… moment:

    The Model Penal Code recognizes four different levels of mens rea: purpose (same as intent), knowledge, recklessness and negligence.

    The key feature added by the Model Penal Code’s system is that for any criminal statute, unless the statute specifically states otherwise, the defendant must commit all elements of the crime with a mental state of recklessness or greater (i.e., recklessness, knowledge of purpose).

    https://lawshelf.com/courseware/entry/model-penal-codes-mens-rea

    Their ACTIONS show there was knowledge, purpose AND intent. But, we’re being prepped to accept an outcome similar to Comey’s exoneration of Hillary. (Note: The irony is that the US Code that Hillary violated by mishandling Confidential Information did NOT require the element of “Criminal Intent” to be prosecuted, though that was the excuse Comey used to claim she should not be prosecuted, In McCabe’s case, undeniable evidence of intentional deception exists, which demonstrates Mens Rea, so now we’re being told “Jurors are to stupid to understand this” and THAT is why HE won’t be prosecuted, either.

    But, it’s ALL a simple distraction to divert focus AWAY from the underlying attempted coup, and DC’s unwillingness to pursue the Seditionists behind it.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s