It's Flynn's file, the firm isn't supposed to have a say in whether they turn it over. If they failed to organize it properly, that's on the firm.BQ78 said:
Having been involved in discovery on patent cases it could be very labor intensive to review and read everything.
Powell needs to explain why she needs them and is not just be punitive.
They should be that well organized in this day and age. Back when I was doing that it was all by hand and with labels. LOL.fasthorse05 said:
How difficult is it to produce those documents?
Per your previous comments, it sounded like most law firms have all of their documents extremely well organized and filed. And they're only sending them over electronically, so there shouldn't be THAT much labor involved. Besides, it can't be that much different than the massive requests and demands they get every day.
Just spit balling for two reasons, one is I too am dying to see those phone call records, and if the court demanded these docs, isn't C&B kinda pushing Sullivan's patience, not unlike Powell did for a while?
Too busy working on his next book.texaggierm said:
So why would H.R. McMaster not be as hands on as Flynn would have been?
The last few pages of hand written notes dumped were pretty gooddrcrinum said:aggiehawg said:Oooh, the documents will be filed on the public docket, meaning they are not subject to the protective order and Sydney can talk about them.drcrinum said:
Popcorn time.
Doesn't sound like much: 32 pages of handwritten notes & a few pages with hand written notations.
fasthorse05 said:
I have no idea what McMaster is like as a man, but assuming its true he hired Eric Ciarmarello, then he's going to have to perform several really good chores!
Cliff's notes? I'm on call with Dish network right now and those take forever.Quote:
The last few pages of hand written notes dumped were pretty good
DUH! She's building the civil case against them on Flynn's behalf. Which might explain why they failed and refused to transfer the complete file to her nearly a year ago.BQ78 said:
Having been involved in discovery on patent cases it could be very labor intensive to review and read everything.
Powell needs to explain why she needs them and is not just be punitive.
McMaster wasn't an original Trump guy like Flynn and was not an outsider. Also since he replaced Flynn it put him in an awkward position if he were to try to shut down the investigation, the whole point was Flynn could have stopped it before it got momentum as it was basically dead until they did the perjury trap on Flynn.texaggierm said:
So why would H.R. McMaster not be as hands on as Flynn would have been?
Your words make me think you are considering this a "Discovery" issue. I do not believe it is...this is like "I need to see all of my records you collected to defend me." And Powell's request is Flynns request...I have been through litigation discovery before as well...contract litigation...BQ78 said:
Having been involved in discovery on patent cases it could be very labor intensive to review and read everything.
Powell needs to explain why she needs them and is not just be punitive.
This is not an FBI operation...this is a an Attorney representing Flynn, who is going after documents/documentation held by Flynn's previous Attorney.fasthorse05 said:
Just watched 30 minutes of Dobbs on FNC, and Tom Fitton was on. Fitton made a comment about Durham's investigation, and asked "why didn't Durham go into the FBI and get the servers? That's the way a real investigation is done!"
He suggested Barr/Durham are behaving more like this is an administrative investigation, and that if the FBI was running an investigation on Judicial Watch, they would get the servers first.
Sounds good to me, but I have no idea if the federal government is a different MO regarding servers.
Yes, I'm looking for y'alls expertise.
Sterling82 said:
I don't think so. Wray was more likely left in place to cover the tracks of Comey and Mueller. He seems to be working hard to do just that.
This. The McNamera book was great.Quote:
I don't know what he's like either as a man but I admired a lot of things he wrote (the McNamera book) and his (not being gratuitous with the term) brilliant victory as a Brigade commander over AQI at Tal Afar.
I honestly think that a quasi-academic outsider that was not a political operative or at least politically savvy would have real difficulty wrapping their brain around and believe the level of visceral hatred for Trump and that it could lead to (or be the excuse for) the type of devious behavior that was going on in the NSC and other places in the various intelligence agencies.Quote:
I do find it ironic that McMaster wrote a meticulous biography and analysis of Robert Strange McNamera's management of the DoD and the war in Vietnam and titled it with his verdict of Dereliction of Duty and yet his feckless incompetence to bring subversive political partisans into key NSC positions could fairly be labeled dereliction of duty unless McMaster is also a subversive policital partisan in which case he was just doing what he came there to do.
Powell is essentially asking for proof that Holder and Chertoff weren't involved with framing Flynn and throwing his defense.BQ78 said:
The tweet says it is Holder's and Chertoff's phone records, not Flynn's.
You have been away for awhile.BillYeoman said:
AggieHawg is the best! Thank you for your clarity and legal insight in this mess!
Go Coogs!
Gig'em!
Pig Sooey!
And God Bless the United States!
BQ78 said:
The tweet says it is Holder's and Chertoff's phone records, not Flynn's.
Quote:
No, entrapment is the wrong word. As I have detailed above, what the Comey-McCabe-Strzok-Page cabal did to Flynn was far worse than entrapment. It was an abuse of power on par with the worst such abuses this country has ever seen. The law enforcement elite of an incumbent administration used the very mechanisms established to protect our national security to attack a campaign of the opposing party and continue that attack as that campaign transitioned into power.
At this point is there really any sh-- storm that could hurt Trump in any way? They have tried everything to bring down Trump over the past four years. They have even impeached him.Rockdoc said:
Wray is safe until the election and he knows it. He knows what a **** storm it would create for trump. Since this didn't really happen under his watch, I can't see why he protects the bad actors.
It's perjury. It's witness tampering. It's organized crime. It's obstruction of justice.benchmark said:
None of these 'abuse of power' scribes ever mentions a specific statute that was violated. One would assume 'Obstruction of Justice' ... but has there ever been a like-kind example involving the DOJ/FBI? Outrage fatigue.
Michael Flynn case how FBI officials, step by step, abused their powerQuote:
No, entrapment is the wrong word. As I have detailed above, what the Comey-McCabe-Strzok-Page cabal did to Flynn was far worse than entrapment. It was an abuse of power on par with the worst such abuses this country has ever seen. The law enforcement elite of an incumbent administration used the very mechanisms established to protect our national security to attack a campaign of the opposing party and continue that attack as that campaign transitioned into power.
MouthBQ98 said:
I think that may be part of the problem. A corrupt abuse of power on this scale and magnitude by this part of the government has never been contemplated, and it may actually be difficult to find statutory law that covers most of it.
Specific to the Flynn case, sadly, those are all going to be difficult crimes to prosecute ... even the most egregious 'editing' of Flynn's 302.Ellis Wyatt said:
It's perjury. It's witness tampering. It's organized crime. It's obstruction of justice.
MouthBQ98 said:
I think that may be part of the problem. A corrupt abuse of power on this scale and magnitude by this part of the government has never been contemplated, and it may actually be difficult to find statutory law that covers most of it.
Ironically, the editing of the 302 is a crime under the same statute that Flynn was charged with violating, 18 U.S.C. 1001. Also obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. Sections 1501-1521.benchmark said:Specific to the Flynn case, sadly, those are all going to be difficult crimes to prosecute ... even the most egregious 'editing' of Flynn's 302.Ellis Wyatt said:
It's perjury. It's witness tampering. It's organized crime. It's obstruction of justice.
LINKQuote:
The crime can take any number of forms, whether it's bribery, tampering with evidence, lying to investigators, abusing one's power, or some other act intended to impede a criminal investigation. The federal obstruction of justice statute is written broadly and focuses more on the effect (or intended effect) of a particular action rather than the specific act itself. Therefore, seemingly innocuous acts could be construed as criminal activity if they have the intended effect of impeding justice.
