The full transcript of a call between Trump lawyers and Flynn lawyers has been released by the judge overseeing Flynn's sentencing. A partial transcript of the conversation was included in the Mueller report as one of the claimed instances where Trump might have obstructed justice. The basic claim is that Trump was dangling a potential pardon for Flynn in return for a "heads up" about information that "implicates the President". Transcript here.
Problems with this: No pardon was dangled. Trump's lawyer basically said Trump still likes Flynn. This is entirely reliant on implication.
No confidential information was requested. The Executive branch has legal privileges that it may need to assert with respect to anything Flynn tells the special counsel. And as national security advisor (even briefly) Flynn would also have information relevant to national security generally.
The conversation was between two lawyers and thus subject to attorney-client privilege.
The way I read this is Trump's counsel basically saying that Flynn's counsel should pass on a heads-up on any information that might be subject to presidential privileges so the White House counsel can protect that privilege. This is both entirely proper and obligatory for any competent attorney.
In the same story, we find out that Mueller's legal team refused to provide the judge with full transcripts of other recordings they have of Flynn, or make public any additional information they have. That's suggestive that the full transcripts support Flynn's story rather than the FBI's story, and likely that the FBI has many more transcripts of Flynn's conversations than they have admitted (indicating he was personally under surveillance). We'll see how well the judge takes that refusal.
I speculated about the possibility that Carter Page was a cooperating target some time ago. It was just speculation, and it's still just speculation. While that would make the FBI's life easier in some ways, it would still be a fraud on the court. I don't think that would be a get out of jail free card for anyone, especially as there are likely other FISA targets.
Andrew McCarthy thinks it is unlikely the grand jury voted against indictment, suggesting that sealed charges, a more complicated case (ie, prosecutors want more time), or just jurors wanting more information is a more likely explanation. Those are all reasonable possibilities, but they mostly rely on the idea that it's easy to get a grand jury indictment (the classic "ham sandwich" case).
What bothers me is that that only applies if the prosecutor actually wants an indictment. If they want a no-bill they can blame on the jury, that seems like something they could easily arrange.
The FBI under Wray is trying to keep secret information that would likely (according to Solomon's sources) cast doubt on the veracity and credibility of Steele's information, which was used days later to apply for a surveilance warrant from the FISC. While we have only seen redacted versions of that document publicly, the FISA does state that no negative information about Steele as known. We've already seen other messages from Kavalec (at State) to the FBI about Steele and his information -- messages that noted major flaws such as the reference to a non-existent Russian consulate in Miami.
Wray is abusing the classification system to try to protect bad actors at the FBI from the consequences of their actions, along with, perhaps, the reputation of his agency. But neither deserves that protection.
The way to protect the reputation of the FBI is to root out the bad actors and subject them to the full force of the law for their transgressions, and then reform the policies and procedures as necessary to prevent any repeat offenses.
That should start with Wray. Obstruction of justice seems appropriate.
Beto wants credit card companies to impose gun control
The Left have been nibbling around the edges of this idea for a while, but this is the first time I've noticed one of their candidates pushing it openly instead of trying to sneak it in through the back door with pressure from regulators quietly. They think that with the NRA distracted they can run on this and break the ability of gun owners to stop their gun confiscation laws. That's pretty bad. Worse, though, is that they can try to apply this sort of pressure outside of traditional political channels. They don't even have to win elections or appoint biddable judges. They think they can do it with public relations pressure on a few key gatekeepers. Let's make sure they are wrong.
This is supposed to be the big kahuna, the report that breaks the scandal wide open and puts people in jail. While we may see a lot of information become public, I've grown skeptical on Barr's ability and desire to bring actual prosecutions. Notably, we got this news on Friday the 13th, the week of 9-11, in the late afternoon. That's where stories go to die. And the IG is an Obama appointee who has already whitewashed the Clinton investigation.
There are still review steps that need to take place before any actual release, so if the usual pattern holds, we'll see leaks from the report designed to spin it as much as possible before it is actually released. Any big SpyGate news breaks in the next few weeks, figure that's what it is doing, and read it closely.
Read the whole thing. I'm not 100% sure I agree with the premise -- that the generation usually known as the Millennials is really made up of two extremely polarized groups driving the current political conflict -- but I'm not 100% sure I reject it either. The left-ward side fits: Antifa, gender and pronoun police, and so on. I'm just not seeing so much of the other side of that coin. Some, to be sure.
is his connection to Ruby Ridge. If he was willing to cover up what happened there, where 3 innocent people died, why would he be unwilling to cover up FISA abuse and political spying? And even if Barr is honest and trying to expose the abuse -- still an open question -- then wouldn't his involvement in Ruby Ridge serve as leverage to the people at the FBI and DOJ desperately trying to cover their asses in the present?
McCabe is merely the first of many scapegoats and fall guys to be offered up to assuage the public fury. But notice how "it was unclear... whether that would happen". Jessie Liu, who has already made decisions not to prosecute other SpyGate figures, doesn't want to go out on a limb publicly and recommend against for McCabe. But there are other people who can say no, and the grand jury itself (convened in DC) might decline. A prosecutor who doesn't really want to indict can easily convince a grand jury to make that decision for her.
And still not even a hint of charges for Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Nellie, Strzok... never mind the real decision-makers, Clinton and Obama.
They claimed they lost their own notes and are still refusing to produce evidence Flynn's new lawyer can describe with specificity. Note that they aren't denying it exists; they just won't give it to the defense. There are also allegations that additional Page/Strzok messages were withheld, along with evidence Mifsud was working for the FBI.
That sounds positive, but my cynical side is saying that if they were going to actually charge people, they would be hyping that. If they are hyping "the IG found the FISA warrants illegal" that means they don't have actual charges to hype.
I suppose I could be wrong. It's possible the report includes criminal referrals that will be prosecuted or unsealed at a later date. We'll see.
FBI analyst admits snooping on political opponent's emails
It wasn't using his government authority, but rather the trusted position his wife had in working for the man whose emails he stole, shopped to the media, and presented to his superiors. But why would I trust him to follow the rules with access to national security secrets when he can't be trusted in small things?
This is the case where a Russian woman was accused by the FBI of, basically, conducting honeypot-style attempts at gaining political influence within the US by pretending to be interested in gun rights and using contacts within the NRA.
Now, one of the people she was accused of seducing has come forward to allege that he himself was a confidential FBI informant and at the instruction of the FBI kindled a manipulative romantic relationship with Maria. That exactly inverts what the FBI claimed was going on, and it appears there was exculpatory material not provided to the defense in her case as well.
The case has many parallels with the Flynn and Papadopoulos cases. So far as I know, the only thing Maria is actually accused of is having contacts in Russia and taking some direction from them. The biggest question mark was whether she was sleeping with people to gain influence with them. If that part was something initiated by the FBI informant she was sleeping with, well, it puts a different spin on things, doesn't it?
It shouldn't be illegal to come to the US and talk about politics and political issues like the right to keep and bear arms, even if you are coordinating with people who share your opinions in your home country. I don't know if that's ALL she was doing, or trying to do, but when the FBI's own confidential informant says we should take a second look at the case because she's being treated unfairly and the FBI is withholding exculpatory information, we should pay attention. Especially in the context of the Russia Hoax. This looks like it's very much a part of the same frame job.
Two Somali "refugees" arrested for supporting ISIS
The Conservative Treehouse has details. Supporting terrorism seems to be substantially more likely among the Somali refugee population. This is why it's a bad ideal to import masses of refugees from foreign cultures who are not likely to assimilate well.
McCabe seeks gun control while DOJ seeks his text messages
It seems that the DOJ is trying to access McCabe's text messages. Those same messages were previously sought by Congress, apparently without success. The FBI did provide heavily redacted messages, so they do have copies.
The only legitimate explanation I have for why the FBI might refuse to provide them to Congress is the classic "ongoing investigation". If McCabe is still at risk for charges, the FBI would be right to keep a lot of those messages secret until that matter is resolved. Or, they might be just using that as an excuse; the FBI has squandered any credit they had in this matter long ago.
A Massachusetts mayor gets arrested for bribes and kickbacks. One of the kickbacks was right out of the third world -- allegedly giving someone a job and demanding half their salary as a kickback. He also allegedly demanded cash payments for writing letters of non-opposition to marijuana businesses and demanded personal gifts in exchange for basic city services like activating water service to a new building.
Not mentioned until the 5th paragraph: he is a Democrat.
(Pretty sure that was not mentioned at all in the first version of the story I read; it was there when I wrote this post the next day, though).
Gun control is another area where I don't trust Barr. Or Trump. McConnell has already said he will allow votes if Trump supports a proposal. It might be a good idea to contact the White House and encourage Trump to shut down any gun control proposals if he wants a second term.
