Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

In my opinion, no rational person could side with one side in this morass all the time, on every issue

That statement of mine was more describing me than you, or Russ, or anyone else.  We do need to work on your conciseness though!
J

Originally Posted by Mel Maki

James Lacey

The judge did walk back his statements some, but there is no doubt that the White House and Fox News and all the other supporters that endorse the narrative that Flynn is a good guy who was entrapped by the FBI and only committed a minor process crime is far from the truth. The judge made it clear that he did not appreciate Flynn and his supporters trying to shift the blame after having pleaded guilty. In the sentencing hearing, the judge forced Flynn to admit in court that he was guilty and that the FBI did not entrap him. This stuff is more fun if one side doesn't lie about everything and try to undermine the rule of law. The party of law and order indeed.



James, I get the back and forth we do here, but do you really think this prosecution has been even-handed? Just a remarkable concurrence of events?

Hi Mel, James:

I think Mel is making a good point.  Flynn can have committed a serious crime, and the investigation can be tainted.  Alan Dershowitz had a good article making this point the other day.   https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/421634-alan-dershowitz-did-michael-flynn-lie-or-did-the-fbi-act-improperly

Flynn is apparently getting what he deserves.  But I am also disturbed by the entrapment aspects of this case and of course the deleted texts.  History repeats itself.

Jim

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

How can it possibly be entrapment for the FBI to investigate an intelligence failure and potential attack from Russia by questioning the National Security Advisor?

BTW, just as a "civilian" that has dealt with the FBI, I would SHIT MY PANTS if i ever even thought about lying to the FBI. Flynn did it in a premeditated manner, the full reasons for which have not fully come out (but are obvious).

Hi Russ:

It's not entrapment in the "throw out the case" police misconduct sense of the word.  It is disturbing behavior by the FBI for the reasons Dershowitz explained:  

"Is it the proper role of law enforcement to conduct criminal morality tests to determine whether citizens will tell the truth or lie when given the opportunity to do either by FBI agents? Is it proper to target individuals for such tests for the purpose of pressuring them into becoming witnesses against the real target?

These are important questions for all citizens who care about civil liberties and prosecutorial abuses."

Also, I mentioned that the deleted texts bothered me.  Are you going to give the FBI a pass on that issue?  As a business owner you have probably had your attorneys drill into you the lesson that if litigation is threatened, all relevant communications must be preserved under the threat of grave penalties.  This is law 101.  I am flabbergasted that the Strozk/Page texts were deleted.  Based upon the deletion alone, I am convinced that the texts referenced exculpatory evidence, or contained matters that would seriously embarrass the FBI.  

Jim

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

You have ZERO knowledge of anything, aside from what you read in the leftist press and what you watch on Rachel Maddow.  I guess we didn't realize you were part of the Prosecution team. 

Enlighten us all oh Karnak, what did he specifically LIE about?  You seem to know what you don't know.  

I think that Flynn lied, and admitted to lying, about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.  Obviously the only thing any of us base our opinions on is what we have read or seen on the news.  Why would you state something so obvious as if were a legitimate point of argument?

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

You have ZERO knowledge of anything, aside from what you read in the leftist press and what you watch on Rachel Maddow.  I guess we didn't realize you were part of the Prosecution team. 

Enlighten us all oh Karnak, what did he specifically LIE about?  You seem to know what you don't know.  

Hi Richard:

p.s.  Here is the statement detailing Flynn's lies.  Note his signature at the bottom.  I simply can not figure out why the heck you are challenging Russ's characterization of Flynn's lies.  Russ, and all of us, have it straight from the General's hand.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

Jim 

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Hi Jim,   

 I have to ask, why are you flabbergasted at anything this Corrupt FBI under the leadership of the Corrupt James Comey, has done?  

He admitted to lying to Congress.  He admitted to taking Gov't Documents home and putting them on his computer.  

He let Hilary Clinton Destroy evidence w/impunity.

He gave his "professor" friend documents and TOLD him to leak them to the press so that he could get an investigation going on Trump.

He testified to Congress that Hilary lied MULTIPLE times, tried to destroy 30,000 emails, many of which were classified, and VIOLATED FBI protocol by holding a press conference and telling the world that Nobody, no prosecutor in the country in their right minds would charge Hilary Clinton.  

That was not HIS call to make.  He is law enforcement (corrupt law enforcement) and it was not HIS call to get out and tell the world that she wouldn't be prosecuted.

The other criminals, one being the former CIA head John Brennan who lied to Congress were not charged and the other Bald headed guy his buddy, James Clapper lied to Congress but was not charged.


Anyone tied to the Democrat party is given a pass and apparently has carte blanche to commit Federal Crimes, yet they are not charged, but any Peon who even has the smallest scintilla of connection to Trump or Republicans ARE charged.

Do you not find those facts VERY disturbing?  

If you do, then why on Earth would you be flabbergasted that these corrupt FBI officials get away with everything?  

Yes, I find some of that disturbing.  That was my point.  My other point is that Flynn lied and must suffer the consequences.  These are not mutually exclusive conclusions, which was Dershowitz's point.  

Jim

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Hi Jim,   

 ...then why on Earth would you be flabbergasted that these corrupt FBI officials get away with everything?  

What I said is that I am flabbergasted that they deleted the texts.  It remains to be seen whether "they get away with it."

Jim

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/18/donald-trump-rudy-giuliani-distorted-facts-report-fbi-texts/2357225002/

"The June [IG] report said “a large number of FBI employees” were affected by the failure of the text message collection tool and the loss of data did not result “from the actions of any FBI employee, including Strzok.”"


How do the deleted texts in question relate to the criminal conduct of Flynn anyway?

Hi Russ:

I think that the USA fact checker is misleading you, although I could be the one who is being misled, I have not dug deep into this.  The Text Message Collection tool has nothing to do with the texts sent while Strzok was in the Special Counsel's Office (SCO) and interviewing Flynn.  The texts from Strozok's stint in the SCO were reviewed and then intentionally deleted by someone in the SCO.   According to the relevant IG report, {the} "SCO's Records Officer told the OIG that as part of the office's records retention procedure, the officer reviewed Strzok's DOJ issued iPhone after he returned it to the SCO and determined it contained no substantive text messages." (emphasis added).

Maybe there were no substantive messages.  Maybe this is an intentional cover up.  It should not have happened.

Here is the relevant OIG report, look at the top of page 3:  https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2018/i-2018-003523.pdf

USA Today seems to have intentionally mixed apples and oranges.  Buried in the final three paragraphs of the fact check USAT states:

The new IG report also said that Strzok and Page received iPhones from the Department of Justice after they were assigned to the special counsel’s office in the spring of 2017.

No data could be recovered from the iPhones, because the DOJ reset the phones to factory settings after Page and Strzok left the special counsel’s office. Both FBI employees had the iPhones for less than two months, and they continued to use their FBI-issued phones while working in the special counsel’s office, according to the report.

Breitbart, a conservative website, said the special counsel’s office “scrubbed” Strzok’s iPhone before giving it to the IG’s office, but there is no evidence in the IG report of any wrongdoing. The report notes that the DOJ “routinely resets mobile devices to factory settings when the device is returned” by an employee.


If you have time, look at the December OIG report, linked above.

Jim

On Edit - Trump is the one mixing apples and oranges. Hence the USA Today and PolitiFact fact checks.  Nonetheless, these are shoddy and confusing fact checks.

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Jim,

Haven't those texts since been recovered? There is plenty of reporting saying this, and also that the only reason they were not initially available was due to a technical glitch that affected lots of communication at the FBI.

Politifact rates the claim that "texts were purposely and illegally deleted" as pants on fire false. 

Hi James:  See my reply to Russ, I've been working this thread from the bottom up.  The texts on Strzok's phone from his time with the Special Counsel's Office were absolutely purposefully deleted.  See the December AIG report I linked to in my reply to Russ.   Were they illegally deleted?  Not that I know of.

Still - consider this: Strozok was quietly fired from the SCO team when his unprofessional texts to Page began to become public.  The texts that got him booted from the SCO team were sent before the election, before the SCO investigation, and on an earlier phone.  The earlier texts show this guy to be a partisan and obviously it has bled into his work, and Mueller had no choice but to boot Strzok off of the SCO team when he discovered this.

So, Strzok is booted from the SCO team because of his unprofessional texting behavior.  Then, what does the SCO records custodian do when Strzok turns in his SCO phone?  She reviews the texts, says there is nothing here, and resets it.  That is bad form and embarrassing to the FBI.  Obviously Flynn chose to take the plea deal, and obviously he was guilty because he admits it.  That does not give the FBI a pass in my view.  If I ever have the misfortune of being prosecuted for a political crime using investigations undertaken by an agent who is (A) known to be partisan against me by his earlier texts, and (B) has conveniently had his texts from the time of his investigation of me deleted, I'll be calling for dismissal of the charges based upon destruction of potentially exculpatory evidence.

The above is all my own thinking, and I could be full of it.  Like I said to Russ, I have not dug deep.  But I trust Dershowitz more than I trust most other commentators, and the texts we are talking about bother him too.  

Jim

Originally Posted by James Brown

Hi Russ:

I think that the USA fact checker is misleading you, although I could be the one who is being misled, I have not dug deep into this.  The Text Message Collection tool has nothing to do with the texts sent while Strzok was in the Special Counsel's Office (SCO) and interviewing Flynn.  The texts from Strozok's stint in the SCO were reviewed and then intentionally deleted by someone in the SCO.   According to the relevant IG report, {the} "SCO's Records Officer told the OIG that as part of the office's records retention procedure, the officer reviewed Strzok's DOJ issued iPhone after he returned it to the SCO and determined it contained no substantive text messages." (emphasis added).

Maybe there were no substantive messages.  Maybe this is an intentional cover up.  It should not have happened.

Here is the relevant OIG report, look at the top of page 3:  https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2018/i-2018-003523.pdf

USA Today seems to have intentionally mixed apples and oranges.  Buried in the final three paragraphs of the fact check USAT states:

The new IG report also said that Strzok and Page received iPhones from the Department of Justice after they were assigned to the special counsel’s office in the spring of 2017.

No data could be recovered from the iPhones, because the DOJ reset the phones to factory settings after Page and Strzok left the special counsel’s office. Both FBI employees had the iPhones for less than two months, and they continued to use their FBI-issued phones while working in the special counsel’s office, according to the report.

Breitbart, a conservative website, said the special counsel’s office “scrubbed” Strzok’s iPhone before giving it to the IG’s office, but there is no evidence in the IG report of any wrongdoing. The report notes that the DOJ “routinely resets mobile devices to factory settings when the device is returned” by an employee.


If you have time, look at the December OIG report, linked above.

Jim

Ok, I just perused the entire 12/18 OIG report, including the FBI's chummy response.  I think I have the facts more or less correct in the posts above, but please feel free to correct me.  

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2018/i-2018-003523.pdf

Jim