Flynn case judge issues unusual order telling government to certify evidence is ‘true and correct’
The federal judge in the case of former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn told the Justice Department to file a declaration -- under penalty of perjury -- by Monday that evidence in the case is “true and correct.”www.foxnews.com
The court order was issued after prosecutors admitted accidently altered documents -- notes written by former FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe -- were used.
“The government has acknowledged that altered FBI records have been produced by the government and filed on the record in this case,” noted Judge Emmet Sullivan
The order from Sullivan comes as the government again requested the judge dismiss the criminal case against Flynn, a move Sullivan has so far resisted.
this is easy they say the evidence is not true and go arrest mccabe and stzok on multiple charges.
And? As we have already been informed, he did so out of coercion.Flynn pleaded guilty. Twice.
If you are starting a thread on this topic, under the influence of "Trump TV", IOW, Fox News, you are already woefully misinformed.
Flynn's "lawyer" Sidney Powell, applied for "the job" of actually representing Trump, Flynn is simply Trump's surrogate, by "rehearsing" for this "assignment" as all recent Trump "puppets" have, (see "Dr." Scott Atlas), as a Fox News "talking head".
The "gubmint" has "responded" to Flynn's SENTENCING judge's order.
Consider this ANALysis of the "response" to Judge Emmet Sullivan's order. IOW, the "gubmint" does not seem concerned about responding, "under penalty of perjury". :
Mix some hot cocoa, if you're serious about learning how deep the corner Barr and Trump have backed themselves into, by attempting the current ploy to "free" Flynn, vs. not interfering in Flynn's sentencing and just letting Flynn have a felony on his record, and then commuting any punitive sentence, ala Roger Stone. None of these criminals can be pardoned because pardon removes their fifth amendment protections if ordered to testify, "down the road" under oath related to Trump's and Barr's abuses of office.
A LOOOOOOOOOONG READ :
Shorter DOJ: We Made Shit Up ... Please Free Mike Flynn - emptywheel
DOJ not only made a slew of new errors in their "authentication" of the documents in the Mike Flynn case, but they admitted that they lied when the called Bill Barnett's interview report a 302, which raises questions about its regularity.www.emptywheel.net
Umm we have been telling you for months that the attonery that was prosecuting the case van lack or whatever his name wasOr the judge is warning the DOJ, perjury by DOJ attorneys will not be taken lightly...
The court order was issued after prosecutors admitted accidently altered documents -- notes written by former FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe -- were used.
Flynn case judge issues unusual order telling government to certify evidence is ‘true and correct’
The federal judge in the case of former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn told the Justice Department to file a declaration -- under penalty of perjury -- by Monday that evidence in the case is “true and correct.”www.foxnews.com
You are misinformed. There is nothing besides his shit attorney claiming that and therefore you will not find anything official stating that either.And? As we have already been informed, he did so out of coercion.
Then he committed perjury in open court, who coerced him to do that instead of telling the judge his guilty plea was coerced?And? As we have already been informed, he did so out of coercion.
Umm we have been telling you for months that the attonery that was prosecuting the case van lack or whatever his name was
perjured himself. we have been telling you for months that strzok and others had perjured themselves.
now only now do you actually believe any of it.
the DOJ should very much state that the information that he was given was perjured testimony and that the people that did it will be arrested.
Actually that was what was misrepresented. Strzok and McCabe and other altered testimony that flynn gave.That is not what was misrepresented to the court... Good lord... At least try to keep up...
Umm we have been telling you for months that the attonery that was prosecuting the case van lack or whatever his name was
perjured himself. we have been telling you for months that strzok and others had perjured themselves.
now only now do you actually believe any of it.
the DOJ should very much state that the information that he was given was perjured testimony and that the people that did it will be arrested.
Actually that was what was misrepresented. Strzok and McCabe and other altered testimony that flynn gave.
it is documented. the DOJ should absolutely admit that the former prosecutor and Strzok and McCabe submitted perjured testimony
which is why they are dropping the case and that they will be arrested for perjury.
only now do you start believing what we have been saying for months why is that?
I don't know who informed you of what but when you decide to make a guilty plea to the Court the Judge covers that base and specifically forces you to say under oath that the reason you are making the guilty plea is because you are in fact guilty. Once you have crossed that bridge, it is very difficult to uncross it.And? As we have already been informed, he did so out of coercion.
I don't know where you get your information from, but it is highly flawed and not factual with any type of reason.We're not laughing WITH you....
that is what they did when they turned it in for evidence against flynn they certified under perjury that their statements were true and factual they weren't.Sigh.. .you clearly did not read the article...
What was misrepresented was that the counsel for McCabe and Strzok had certified the accuracy of the documents the DOJ filed Monday. The counsel for McCabe and Strzok deny certifying the accuracy of the documents. Judges take very seriously when and attorney misrepresents to the court what has occurred.
I don't know where you get your information from, but it is highly flawed and not factual with any type of reason.
It is proven fact that Strzok and paige changed testimony.
In fact the FBI lost the original 302 that was taken by the original investigators that stated they did not think that flynn lied andThe Michael Flynn smoking gun: FBI headquarters altered interview summary
As a self-proclaimed adherent to Hanlon’s Razor, I once cynically viewed the frenzied focus on FBI actions during the 2016 Russian election-meddling investigation as partisan and overwrought. Hanlon’s Razor suggests that we never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by...www.washingtonexaminer.com
wanted to close the case.
DOJ Admits in Michael Flynn Case That FBI ‘Mistakenly Identified’ Peter Strzok Notes | National Review
The attorneys prosecuting former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn were forced to admit in a Tuesday letter to Flynn’s legal defense that the notes which formed the official docum…www.nationalreview.com
The attorneys prosecuting former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn were forced to admit in a Tuesday letter to Flynn’s legal defense that the notes which formed the official document describing Flynn’s January 2017 interview were not written by agent Peter Strzok, as they’ve maintained throughout the case.
“We were informed that the notes we had identified as Peter Strzok’s, were actually the other agent’s notes (see Surreply, Exhibit 1), and what we had identified as the other agent’s notes were in fact Strzok’s notes (see Surreply, Exibit 2)” the letter to Flynn’s lawyer Sidney Powell reads.
“Those changes added an unequivocal statement that ‘Flynn stated he did not’ — in response to whether Mr. Flynn had asked Kislyak to vote in a certain manner or slow down the UN vote [on sanctions],” Powell wrote. “This is a deceptive manipulation because, as the notes of the agents show, Mr. Flynn was not even sure he had spoken to Russia/Kislyak on the issue. He had talked to dozens of countries.”
“That question and answer does not appear in the notes, yet it was made into a criminal offense,” Powell argued in the motion. “The draft also shows that the agents moved a sentence to make it seem to be an answer to a question it was not.”
Released text messages between Strzok and Page show that on February 10, the same day that news broke from “senior intelligence officials” that Flynn had discussed sanctions with Kislyak, Strozk told Page that he had updated the 302 form to reflect her edits.
“I made your edits, and sent them to Joe. I also emailed you an updated 302 . . . hopefully it doesn’t need much more editing. I will polish it this weekend, and have it ready for Monday. I really appreciate your times and edits,” Strzok said.
why can't you just admit that the these two FBI agents corrupted the entire process.
I have seen judges throw out cases for less than this. Judges have thrown out trial cases because 1 officer didn't sign an evidence sheet.
Judges have declared mistrials and thrown cases out because an agent touched something he wasn't supposed to.
The fact that we have 2 FBI agents changing testimony the FBI "lost" the original 302 form and original notes taken by the original detectives clearly shows criminal misconduct.
that is what they did when they turned it in for evidence against flynn they certified under perjury that their statements were true and factual they weren't.
again the DOJ should absolutely tell the judge that the information that strzok and mccabe submitted was perjured testimony and that they will be arrested.
Hundreds of millions of people i expect never had their families threatened with endless investigations and prosecutions.Update: hundreds of millions of Americans still haven't lied to the FBI and then pled guilty to it. Further updates to come.
I do not know who informed you, but pleas still get made under coercion regradless of any oath requirement.I don't know who informed you of what but when you decide to make a guilty plea to the Court the Judge covers that base and specifically forces you to say under oath that the reason you are making the guilty plea is because you are in fact guilty. Once you have crossed that bridge, it is very difficult to uncross it.
Prosecution decided not to continue after Flynn plead guilty and was cooperating with the govt.I do not know who informed you, but pleas still get made under coercion regradless of any oath requirement.
So while it may be difficult to cross, it is not impossible. And no one should stand in the way of it when the prosecution decides not to continue the case.
You are misstating what is already known.Prosecution decided not to continue after Flynn plead guilty and was cooperating with the govt.
You do realize that Flynn admitted he lied or are you so Trumpied that you can not even see the facts?Flynn case judge issues unusual order telling government to certify evidence is ‘true and correct’
The federal judge in the case of former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn told the Justice Department to file a declaration -- under penalty of perjury -- by Monday that evidence in the case is “true and correct.”www.foxnews.com
The court order was issued after prosecutors admitted accidently altered documents -- notes written by former FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe -- were used.
“The government has acknowledged that altered FBI records have been produced by the government and filed on the record in this case,” noted Judge Emmet Sullivan
The order from Sullivan comes as the government again requested the judge dismiss the criminal case against Flynn, a move Sullivan has so far resisted.
this is easy they say the evidence is not true and go arrest mccabe and stzok on multiple charges.
Hundreds of millions of people i expect never had their families threatened with endless investigations and prosecutions.
Please see under duress laws.
it pretty much negates any kind of guilty plea. it is why we have these laws to begin with.
it is another check and balance against an abusive government which is clearly going on here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?