6 ms·

Explosive FBI Texts Show Internal Furor at 'Crossfire Hurricane' Handling

17 points by panny 6y ago

tomohawk 6y ago
> The 41 pages of additional evidence demonstrate (i) his innocence; (ii) the absence of any crime; (iii) government misconduct in the investigation of General Flynn; and (iv) continuing prosecutorial misconduct in the suppression of evidence favorable to the defense in violation of Brady v. Maryland and this Court’s Brady order. ECF No. 20 Explosive, indeed
coolgeek 6y ago
> I honestly read each of these Sidney Powell dumps bc FBI is not trustworthy. Maybe there IS something there? > But thus far, all she's shown is that she's an order of magnitude sketchier. https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1309251431543627777 https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1309251431543627777
- blisseyGo 6y ago
  Using a random twitter account's narrative to "debunk" a well established lawyer for a 35 year military general and DOJ's declassified statements is not how things work in the judicial system. That twitter account is blatantly lying and the replies seem to be coming from an echo chamber. For example here's a couple statements easily verifiably wrong. The twitter account says: > Stuff that was already public (tho she didn't admit that) This is so easily probably wrong. The interview of the FBI agent Barnett by USAO Jeff Jenson is from September 17, 2020 which was declassified yesterday. How this twitter account claims "already public"?? > Stuff that proves Peter Strzok didn't have it in for Flynn This is also so easily provable wrong. The FBI agent Barnett (who was one of the agents specifically assigned to the Special Counsel's team) specifically says in his interview: "“Barnett believed the prosecution of Flynn by SCO was used as a means to ‘get TRUMP,'” the report of his interview concluded." The source of the Steele Dossier was literally a Russian agent and was investigated from 2009-2011 until he fled from the country. FBI knew about it in December 2016 as revealed yesterday. https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/25/get-trump-fbi-whistleblower-on-mueller-team-details-real-reason-flynn-was-targeted/ https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/25/get-trump-fbi-whistlebl... https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-bad-intelligence-11601075142 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-bad-intelligence-11601... Clearly that twitter account is spreading misinformation for political reasons and the echo chamber members are buying it because it fits the political narrative.
  - coolgeek 6y ago
    First off, Marci Wheeler is not a random Twitter account. She's an expert in legal and national security issues. She has been a prominent figure in this space for over 10 years. She's been writing about Flynn and the SCO investigation fro the very beginning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcy_Wheeler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcy_Wheeler Second, chiding me for linking a "random" Twitter account betrays a serious lack of self-awareness on your part, given that you've sprinkled random YouTube links throughout this discussion.
    - blisseyGo 6y ago
      Her wikipedia literally states her occupation as "Independent journalist". You would rather believe a journalist who I have clearly exposed as lying and biased with proof. Good luck.
throwaway189262 6y ago
This really, really reeks of propaganda. It's a random document posted on scribd. A few pages of messages with little context. Followed by the wild conclusion that there was no crime, based on the equivalent of 50 text messages in a case that surely has thousands of pages of evidence. I can't even tell what they're talking about in half the exchanges because theres no context. Somebody here has an ax to grind, surprised it's getting upvoted.
- coolgeek 6y ago
  It's not a random document. It's worse. It's an actual filing by Flynn's counsel in an attempt to get his case reversed/dismissed. A case in which he pleaded guilty. Twice. To two different judges. It is propaganda though, and it's being coordinated by Barr, Jensen and other top level DOJ officials.
  - jki275 6y ago
    His case has already been dropped. It's not "attempt to get his case reversed/dismissed", the justice department already dropped the case. The judge overseeing the case is attempting to drag out his final ruling (which is a foregone conclusion, he cannot proceed without a prosecution) until past the election so he can get a different justice department to reinstate the charges, or get the President to pardon Flynn so he can score some political points for his party.
  - blisseyGo 6y ago
    You should watch this to learn the facts about the case: https://youtu.be/Tb2d9x0amuU https://youtu.be/Tb2d9x0amuU Also: > "...the new disclosures demonstrate that Mueller’s prosecutors not only pressured Flynn with the possibility of indicting his son; they also secretly assured Flynn’s former counsel... that Flynn’s son would not be prosecuted if Flynn pleaded guilty. " https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/495366-something-seems-rotten-in-flynns-case-and-maybe-others-too https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/495366-something-seems... This is also more than a month old and a lot more facts have been released since then. Media simply not reporting them because it doesn't fit the narrative doesn't mean the facts aren't important.

17 points by panny 6y ago

> The 41 pages of additional evidence demonstrate (i) his innocence; (ii) the absence of any crime; (iii) government misconduct in the investigation of General Flynn; and (iv) continuing prosecutorial misconduct in the suppression of evidence favorable to the defense in violation of Brady v. Maryland and this Court’s Brady order. ECF No. 20 Explosive, indeed

coolgeek 6y ago

> I honestly read each of these Sidney Powell dumps bc FBI is not trustworthy. Maybe there IS something there? > But thus far, all she's shown is that she's an order of magnitude sketchier. https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1309251431543627777 https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1309251431543627777

blisseyGo 6y ago
Using a random twitter account's narrative to "debunk" a well established lawyer for a 35 year military general and DOJ's declassified statements is not how things work in the judicial system. That twitter account is blatantly lying and the replies seem to be coming from an echo chamber. For example here's a couple statements easily verifiably wrong. The twitter account says: > Stuff that was already public (tho she didn't admit that) This is so easily probably wrong. The interview of the FBI agent Barnett by USAO Jeff Jenson is from September 17, 2020 which was declassified yesterday. How this twitter account claims "already public"?? > Stuff that proves Peter Strzok didn't have it in for Flynn This is also so easily provable wrong. The FBI agent Barnett (who was one of the agents specifically assigned to the Special Counsel's team) specifically says in his interview: "“Barnett believed the prosecution of Flynn by SCO was used as a means to ‘get TRUMP,'” the report of his interview concluded." The source of the Steele Dossier was literally a Russian agent and was investigated from 2009-2011 until he fled from the country. FBI knew about it in December 2016 as revealed yesterday. https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/25/get-trump-fbi-whistleblower-on-mueller-team-details-real-reason-flynn-was-targeted/ https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/25/get-trump-fbi-whistlebl... https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-bad-intelligence-11601075142 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-bad-intelligence-11601... Clearly that twitter account is spreading misinformation for political reasons and the echo chamber members are buying it because it fits the political narrative.
- coolgeek 6y ago
  First off, Marci Wheeler is not a random Twitter account. She's an expert in legal and national security issues. She has been a prominent figure in this space for over 10 years. She's been writing about Flynn and the SCO investigation fro the very beginning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcy_Wheeler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcy_Wheeler Second, chiding me for linking a "random" Twitter account betrays a serious lack of self-awareness on your part, given that you've sprinkled random YouTube links throughout this discussion.
  - blisseyGo 6y ago
    Her wikipedia literally states her occupation as "Independent journalist". You would rather believe a journalist who I have clearly exposed as lying and biased with proof. Good luck.

throwaway189262 6y ago

This really, really reeks of propaganda. It's a random document posted on scribd. A few pages of messages with little context. Followed by the wild conclusion that there was no crime, based on the equivalent of 50 text messages in a case that surely has thousands of pages of evidence. I can't even tell what they're talking about in half the exchanges because theres no context. Somebody here has an ax to grind, surprised it's getting upvoted.

coolgeek 6y ago
It's not a random document. It's worse. It's an actual filing by Flynn's counsel in an attempt to get his case reversed/dismissed. A case in which he pleaded guilty. Twice. To two different judges. It is propaganda though, and it's being coordinated by Barr, Jensen and other top level DOJ officials.
- jki275 6y ago
  His case has already been dropped. It's not "attempt to get his case reversed/dismissed", the justice department already dropped the case. The judge overseeing the case is attempting to drag out his final ruling (which is a foregone conclusion, he cannot proceed without a prosecution) until past the election so he can get a different justice department to reinstate the charges, or get the President to pardon Flynn so he can score some political points for his party.
- blisseyGo 6y ago
  You should watch this to learn the facts about the case: https://youtu.be/Tb2d9x0amuU https://youtu.be/Tb2d9x0amuU Also: > "...the new disclosures demonstrate that Mueller’s prosecutors not only pressured Flynn with the possibility of indicting his son; they also secretly assured Flynn’s former counsel... that Flynn’s son would not be prosecuted if Flynn pleaded guilty. " https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/495366-something-seems-rotten-in-flynns-case-and-maybe-others-too https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/495366-something-seems... This is also more than a month old and a lot more facts have been released since then. Media simply not reporting them because it doesn't fit the narrative doesn't mean the facts aren't important.