No, it isn’t. However, it can be a national security risk. In this case it leaves Flynn vulnerable to kompramat.
The guilty plea was a negotiation. Literally no chance of being tossed
Another opinion?
You’re wrong.
No evidence of deception. What he said wasn’t true it isn’t a lie.
The plea must be based on knowing the gov’ts case against you and must be made freely without coercion.
The new notes and records show they never provided everything in discovery so informed consent wasn’t possible and the threat to go after his family is documented.
There’s a very good chance it will get tossed.
If anything they should have informed the office of the VP and let them take care of it.
The man did absolutely nothing to warrant anything beyond that.
Flynn is not a good guy.
No fact. Cop’s have to inform you of your rights before an interview, if they don’t it’s a Miranda Violation.
When prosecutors withhold evidence from the defense it’s a Brady Violation.
Agreed. He has rights however that were clearly violated here.
He lied. No one forced him to lie.
He was also running a shadow foreign policy as the NSA.
Stop defending him
BS, even the agents saw no evidence to suggest he knowingly lied.
Every incoming administration in history has started meeting with foreign leaders as quickly as they could since at least the cold war era.
Nobody in history had been prosecuted under that statute much less anyone in an incoming administration.
I’m not defending Flynn, I’m literally defending the rights we’re all entitled to as citizens of the US.
We’ll see about the Brady violations. Sullivan is very strict on this. I seriously doubt the Judge will find anything exculpatory. In the new docs. If you believe the FBI acted with malice, there is a very high bar for that. I dont see that happening here. If you want to change the way the FBI operates, that is a valid discussion, but they didn’t act outside of norms here.
Keep in mind here that this was a negotiated guilty plea. The hole case against Flynn wasn’t just about this instance. This was the charge they negotiated.
It isn’t limited solely to exculpatory evidence.
The Plea has to be voluntary with informed consent.
These notes and other records were never given to his defense and they are exculpatory.
They also withheld the original 302’s and only provided the final “revised” versions showing a clear pattern of deception on their part.
The plea was as voluntary and just about any plea the FBI negotiates.
What you are calling deception is simply the way the FBI operates. They threaten to prosecute or get a suspect to turn evidence every day.
OK I can see for sure where this is going. Have a good night.
Yeah…what has Solomon, Powell and Carter been wrong about?
Solomon… where’s the Hunter Biden evidence? Breaking story!! Huge news! Nothing
I don’t know the other 2
I was just going to post this but wanted to make sure no one else had.
And altair1013 also posted it.
https://www.newsmax.com/us/strzok-page-flynn/2020/04/30/id/965493/
Why Strzok is still walking around is a crime in itself IMO.
The whole lot of them belong behind bars for civil rights violations, collusion/conspiracy to deprive one of their civil rights, abuse of office and Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Authority etc.
Cops only have to give Miranda warnings if they take someone into custody. Flynn was not taken into custody.
As for Brady violation, so far the judge has shot down all of Powell’s Brady claims. We’ll see how it turns out.
You understand that Strozk was the senior agent who interviewed Flynn, right?
I don’t see how him revising his own notes is supposed to be outrageous.
These notes are not “exculpatory” - and Flynn plead guilty long before he went to trial - you don’t get discovery if you plea out before the trial.
This is nonsense. You don’t get discovery if you take a plea bargain before the trial starts. Discovery is a trial phase.
Also on the topic of discovery - all of the records recently produced by Barr were not subject to disclosure.
It’s part of the law.
(2) Information Not Subject to Disclosure . Except as permitted by Rule 16(a)(1)(A)-(D), (F), and (G), this rule does not authorize the discovery or inspection of reports, memoranda, or other internal government documents made by an attorney for the government or other government agent in connection with investigating or prosecuting the case. Nor does this rule authorize the discovery or inspection of statements made by prospective government witnesses except as provided in 18 U.S.C. §3500.
