That's really quite a read.nortex97 said:
I'm sure there are a lot of good people in the FBI because it's a large organization, but I don't believe any information they put out at this point. About anything. It's still obviously being run by a crook, and liars for several layers beneath him.
Here's a piece by Andrew McCarthy today that nicely summarizes a lot of what we learned this week;
Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts
7,746,756 Views |
49415 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by fasthorse05
Gread read and thanks for sharing. I only wish McCarthy would finish by connecting the dots with his legal opinion of what crime(s) were committed.nortex97 said:
I'Here's a piece by Andrew McCarthy today that nicely summarizes a lot of what we learned this week;
Probably a good time to post the recent remarks by AG Barr at Hillsdale College:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/remarks-attorney-general-william-p-barr-hillsdale-college-constitution-day-event
I first listened to it on the Hugh Hewitt Show and I think Barr lets us know where things are headed in a very subtle, yet forceful, manner.
Reading this speech, my sense is that Barr and his group are going after something much more valuable and necessary than any election result: the long-term viability of the present justice system as a protector of law and order and a guarantor of the protections enshrined to us all in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Those who have spent the last generation abusing those rights in a position of power are those who Barr is truly going after right now. I think he gets it and I truly believe his team understand the necessity for reform as well. This is one reason why we're getting a slower process than we would all like. Better to make certain you have all your ducks in a row if you want to make the punishment fit the crime and leave a lasting and positive impact on the Department of Justice and the manner in which they pursue investigations and prosecutions.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/remarks-attorney-general-william-p-barr-hillsdale-college-constitution-day-event
I first listened to it on the Hugh Hewitt Show and I think Barr lets us know where things are headed in a very subtle, yet forceful, manner.
Quote:
We are all human. Like any person, a prosecutor can become overly invested in a particular goal. Prosecutors who devote months or years of their lives to investigating a particular target may become deeply invested in their case and assured of the rightness of their cause.
When a prosecution becomes "your prosecution"particularly if the investigation is highly public, or has been acrimonious, or if you are confident early on that the target committed serious crimesthere is always a temptation to will a prosecution into existence even when the facts, the law, or the fair-handed administration of justice do not support bringing charges.
Quote:
In recent years, the Justice Department has sometimes acted more like a trade association for federal prosecutors than the administrator of a fair system of justice based on clear and sensible legal rules. In case after case, we have advanced and defended hyper-aggressive extensions of the criminal law. This is wrong and we must stop doing it.
Quote:
Taking a capacious approach to criminal law is not only unfair to criminal defendants and bad for the Justice Department's track record at the Supreme Court, it is corrosive to our political system. If criminal statutes are endlessly manipulable, then everything becomes a potential crime. Rather than watch policy experts debate the merits or demerits of a particular policy choice, we are nowadays treated to ad naseum speculation by legal pundits often former prosecutors themselves that some action by the President, a senior official, or a member of congress constitutes a federal felony under this or that vague federal criminal statute.
Quote:
The qualities of a good prosecutor are as elusive and as impossible to define as those which mark a gentleman. And those who need to be told would not understand it anyway. A sensitiveness to fair play and sportsmanship is perhaps the best protection against the abuse of power, and the citizen's safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth and not victims, who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.
Reading this speech, my sense is that Barr and his group are going after something much more valuable and necessary than any election result: the long-term viability of the present justice system as a protector of law and order and a guarantor of the protections enshrined to us all in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Those who have spent the last generation abusing those rights in a position of power are those who Barr is truly going after right now. I think he gets it and I truly believe his team understand the necessity for reform as well. This is one reason why we're getting a slower process than we would all like. Better to make certain you have all your ducks in a row if you want to make the punishment fit the crime and leave a lasting and positive impact on the Department of Justice and the manner in which they pursue investigations and prosecutions.
Here's a dot, a big one and one that I already mentioned.benchmark said:Gread read and thanks for sharing. I only wish McCarthy would finish by connecting the dots with his legal opinion of what crime(s) were committed.nortex97 said:
I'Here's a piece by Andrew McCarthy today that nicely summarizes a lot of what we learned this week;
That can only mean one of two things but each depend on a charging decision. By saying releasing this stuff wouldn't interfere with investigation at this time either indictments have been secured or Durham has moved further up the chain and has his sights set on bigger game.Quote:
Finally on Thursday, we were told the rest of the astonishing story. The now-unredacted portion states that Danchenko "was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed [his] documented contacts with suspected Russian intelligence officers" (emphasis added).
Apparently, the information has been concealed from the public for the sake of the Durham investigation. (When information becomes public, that complicates the ability of investigators to question people about what they know and how they know it.) But John Durham, the Connecticut U.S. attorney who is investigating "Russiagate" irregularities, informed Barr that disclosure of the information would not interfere with his investigation at this point.
I always say you can tell when Barr is over target when the right pigs are squealing. Lanny Davis coming unglued is one the right pigs, in my view. He's too closely connected to the DNC and the Clintons and has inside access to the Biden campaign.
As much as I'd like to believe something will be done to these horrible people, I don't see it happening. Thanks for the info aggiehawg.
This excerpt sums it up for the layman
"Through his private intelligence business in London, Steele was known to be working for Russians oligarchs, while Danchenko was on Steele's payroll. That is, the Clinton campaign, and ultimately the Obama administration, colluded with Russians for the purpose of accusing Donald Trump of . . . yes . . . colluding with Russians."
"Through his private intelligence business in London, Steele was known to be working for Russians oligarchs, while Danchenko was on Steele's payroll. That is, the Clinton campaign, and ultimately the Obama administration, colluded with Russians for the purpose of accusing Donald Trump of . . . yes . . . colluding with Russians."
Yes, he is a consummate insider, incredibly. It's amazing the race is even close with confidants like that running things behind the curtain.
Also, consider how dim his little (presumably drunken) rant last night on twitter really is (about a swath of blue states leaving the union if Trump is re-elected or ACB is confirmed).
If they really wanted a functioning nation state of CCP-Dem sympathizers, it would be far easier to just...permit Texas to go. But no, he goes off on a tirade about how wonderful the blue America would be vs. the rest.
Alas, dimwits like these, and Judge Sullivan do serve a purpose;
Also, consider how dim his little (presumably drunken) rant last night on twitter really is (about a swath of blue states leaving the union if Trump is re-elected or ACB is confirmed).
If they really wanted a functioning nation state of CCP-Dem sympathizers, it would be far easier to just...permit Texas to go. But no, he goes off on a tirade about how wonderful the blue America would be vs. the rest.
Alas, dimwits like these, and Judge Sullivan do serve a purpose;
law-apt-3g said:
This excerpt sums it up for the layman
"Through his private intelligence business in London, Steele was known to be working for Russians oligarchs, while Danchenko was on Steele's payroll. That is, the Clinton campaign, and ultimately the Obama administration, colluded with Russians for the purpose of accusing Donald Trump of . . . yes . . . colluding with Russians."
This thread has been saying this for a long time.
So freaking much this. The double-standard with the MSM is so infuriating. Holder was the Wolf for Obama and only those of us who give a damn about justice cared.Quote:
I'm so old I remember when Eric Holder bragged about being Obama's wingman, on things like Ferguson, gun running to Mexico, and political prosecutions in general of anything that could amp up racial divisions (or dropping prosecutions, like with the black panther voter intimidation case). Back then, no heroic USA's or AUSA's spoke up, to my recollection, about how troubled they were with a real politicization of the DoJ, nor did they when Hillary was running rampant at State with Comey covering her flank.
LGB
You could be right eventually that Barr doesn't go ahead with charges of the highest political appointees but he can sit back and watch them come unglued. Desperate people do dumb things and can hoist themselves on their own petard, too.Maacus said:
As much as I'd like to believe something will be done to these horrible people, I don't see it happening. Thanks for the info aggiehawg.
The godless have no moral basis to understand hypocrisy, just does not exist. So...MSM has no idea this double standard frustration problem even exists.
wasted energy being frustrated.
wasted energy being frustrated.
Lying to the FISA court about the reliability of the Dossier's primary subsource was most certainly a crime. So I'm going with (a) ... the indictments have been secured.aggiehawg said:That can only mean one of two things but each depend on a charging decision. By saying releasing this stuff wouldn't interfere with investigation at this time either indictments have been secured or Durham has moved further up the chain and has his sights set on bigger game.benchmark said:
Gread read and thanks for sharing. I only wish McCarthy would finish by connecting the dots with his legal opinion of what crime(s) were committed.
How freakin awesome and Trumpian would it be for Trump to announce pending indictments for all the major Obamagate participants and Hunter Biden during his opening statement for the debate on Tuesday. Hahahaha.
Better yet, have Barr announce them an hour before the debate is scheduled begin (minus Hunter Biden).Eagle2020 said:
How freakin awesome and Trumpian would it be for Trump to announce pending indictments for all the major Obamagate participants and Hunter Biden during his opening statement for the debate on Tuesday. Hahahaha.
SeMgCo87 said:
Not to sound conspiratorial on this thread, but COVID-19 did more than just muck up our economy, and our rights of freedom and liberty.
It also vapor-locked any GJ processes set in place by Durham.
So, even though we waited with baited breath over the last 6 months, this very loud "BOOM" may have been what was planned for earlier...May or June, let's say. And the interim frustrations and anxieties are now being released.
Perhaps it will be a more relaxing time ahead...
Quote:EKUAg said:Quote:
Secolobo said:
Mueller was a cover up operation.
Quote:
And it's one of the main reasons for the covid fear mongering. It caused delays and provides cover. JMHO
To quote myself from pg.1238, it played a large role, just how nefarious of a role is to be determined.
Thomas Jefferson: "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
Summary of the new evidence from my favorite fast talking Canadian former lawyer.
Realizing most have read it, I think this is a great cliffs notes to share with anyone who has no idea what is happening. Read: Your liberal but open-minded family/friends.
A sane voice (Roger L Simon) points out the FBI must be dismantled; it wasn't just 'a few guys on the 7th floor.'
Quote:
What this adds up to, of course, is that although the direction of Obamagate or Spygate (call it what you will) came from the topthe "Seventh Floor" and aboveothers down the food chain knew about it. They too were guilty, although less than their superiors. They were the cowardly soldiers who went along.
How many such people there were we don't know and, needless to say, there still are plenty of good men and women in the FBI, but it's clear the organization has been so corrupted it needs to be dismantledor reformed so entirely it might as well be dismantled.
Christopher Wray, the current director of the FBI, is about as far from the man to accomplish this as you could conjure. A Deep State apparatchik par excellence he has had difficulty going so far as to acknowledge the existence of Antifa. (He finally did). He preferred the canard of saying the real danger was white supremacists. Apparently, he doesn't get out much. Most likely he will be gone very shortly if Trump is reelected.
A new national law enforcement agency should be built from the ground up with its headquarters far from Washington. I would like to think some version of this is on the agenda for Trump II.
But what if Biden wins?
It is quite easy then to imagine a dark scenario.
Say John Durham delivers his long-awaited report somewhere in December or early January just before Biden is inaugurated. Whether or not there are indictments, imagine too that it is filled with details, many of which we may have already seen, but fleshed out with verifiable evidence, pointing all the way to a plot to destroy Trump positively and undeniably implicating Obama and Biden themselves.
Yes, to some extent this has already happened, but what if it is absolutelynailed down?
Needless to say again, the mainstream media will work overtime to discredit it any way possible, but the rest of us will see. We will know beyond a reasonable doubt no, beyond the shadow of doubt what has occurred and what has become of our country.
At the very least it needs to be decentralized.
I'd bet that guy was a good lawyerpanduh bear said:
Summary of the new evidence from my favorite fast talking Canadian former lawyer.
Realizing most have read it, I think this is a great cliffs notes to share with anyone who has no idea what is happening. Read: Your liberal but open-minded family/friends.
Probably not plausible, but:
Have all FBI/DOJ mid-level/Dept. Mgrs. and above provide a Draft policy statement identifying:
1.) What (if anything) they think should be done to improve FBI's performance and its image;
2.) List how and in what order the steps for stated improvements are to be made;
3.) List any/all obstacles/persons he/she thinks would thwart no's 1 and 2 above;
4.) Prescribe a detailed timeline with deadline for completion;
5.) List current person(s) who in his/her opinion would best initiate/successfully complete proposed chgs.
6.) Provide a reasonable budget for completion
7.) Promote individual with "BEST, MOST pratical" solution...and "MONITOR" his/her progress!
Contradictions welcome. Go...
Have all FBI/DOJ mid-level/Dept. Mgrs. and above provide a Draft policy statement identifying:
1.) What (if anything) they think should be done to improve FBI's performance and its image;
2.) List how and in what order the steps for stated improvements are to be made;
3.) List any/all obstacles/persons he/she thinks would thwart no's 1 and 2 above;
4.) Prescribe a detailed timeline with deadline for completion;
5.) List current person(s) who in his/her opinion would best initiate/successfully complete proposed chgs.
6.) Provide a reasonable budget for completion
7.) Promote individual with "BEST, MOST pratical" solution...and "MONITOR" his/her progress!
Contradictions welcome. Go...
Never ask those who are in the middle of draining the swamp to develop the schedule for removing the alligators.whatthehey78 said:
Probably not plausible, but:
Have all FBI/DOJ mid-level/Dept. Mgrs. and above provide a Draft policy statement identifying:
1.) What (if anything) they think should be done to improve FBI's performance and its image;
2.) List how and in what order the steps for stated improvements are to be made;
3.) List any/all obstacles/persons he/she thinks would thwart no's 1 and 2 above;
4.) Prescribe a detailed timeline with deadline for completion;
5.) List current person(s) who in his/her opinion would best initiate/successfully complete proposed chgs.
6.) Provide a reasonable budget for completion
7.) Promote individual with "BEST, MOST pratical" solution...and "MONITOR" his/her progress!
Contradictions welcome. Go...
Thanks for sharing. From the linked Shipwreckedcrew article:
Good grief, why did they wait until 10 days ago to interview Barnett? It was public knowledge Barnett had valuable info months ago. Delaying indictments could only be for info Barnett disclosed that predated Mueller. Going after Weismann would be epic though ... albeit an ancillary investigation and not a reason for a delaying indictments.Quote:
Realize that the Memorandum of his interview filed with Judge Sullivan and given to Gen. Flynn's defense counsel does not reflect everything that Agent Barnett discussed in his interview. Almost all the subjects in the publicly released Memorandum have to do with Gen. Flynn and the Crossfire Razor investigation of him. What else Agent Barnett had to say is hidden away in another Memorandum known only to the investigators.
Because that information covers events both before and after the naming of Robert Mueller as Special Counsel, the information impacts the investigations of both Durham and Jensen. The interview took place only 10 days ago.
The reported change in plans with regard to actions by Durham is likely linked to what Agent Barnett had to say and where that information might take Durham now.
I don't think that's really true. I think they had Jensen's guy re-interview him 2 weeks ago specifically pertaining to this matter (essentially Flynn) so that they could release this 302 to Sullivan's circus act publicly. This wasn't his only interview, or interviews with Durham's team.
It's rare for shipwreckedcrew to get something like this wrong, imho, but he likely did in this case. Note: that doesn't mean I am confident a Durham series of indictments/report is forthcoming in October. But they've already moved way up the food chain (have interviewed Brennan, for instance) and this implies...a lot of work has been done already.
It's rare for shipwreckedcrew to get something like this wrong, imho, but he likely did in this case. Note: that doesn't mean I am confident a Durham series of indictments/report is forthcoming in October. But they've already moved way up the food chain (have interviewed Brennan, for instance) and this implies...a lot of work has been done already.
You are misunderstanding what is happening here. I'd wager there have been multiple interviews with Barnett. But Jensen needed to have a clean version relating solely to Flynn for purposes of filing in Sullivan's court instead of a huge document with massive redactions. That would only serve to raise more questions.benchmark said:
Thanks for sharing. From the linked Shipwreckedcrew article:Good grief, why did they wait until 10 days ago to interview Barnett? It was public knowledge Barnett had valuable info months ago. Delaying indictments could only be for info Barnett disclosed that predated Mueller. Going after Weismann would be epic though ... albeit an ancillary investigation and not a reason for a delaying indictments.Quote:
Realize that the Memorandum of his interview filed with Judge Sullivan and given to Gen. Flynn's defense counsel does not reflect everything that Agent Barnett discussed in his interview. Almost all the subjects in the publicly released Memorandum have to do with Gen. Flynn and the Crossfire Razor investigation of him. What else Agent Barnett had to say is hidden away in another Memorandum known only to the investigators.
Because that information covers events both before and after the naming of Robert Mueller as Special Counsel, the information impacts the investigations of both Durham and Jensen. The interview took place only 10 days ago.
The reported change in plans with regard to actions by Durham is likely linked to what Agent Barnett had to say and where that information might take Durham now.
Durham's interviews? Wide and far ranging. Jensen's interview? Narrow and focused on the task at hand.
Hopefully. And hopefully Shipwreckedcrew also misunderstood. His article inferred Durham may delay the report/indictments based on new info from Barnett's interview 10 days ago.aggiehawg said:
You are misunderstanding what is happening here. I'd wager there have been multiple interviews with Barnett. But Jensen needed to have a clean version relating solely to Flynn for purposes of filing in Sullivan's court instead of a huge document with massive redactions. That would only serve to raise more questions.
Durham's interviews? Wide and far ranging. Jensen's interview? Narrow and focused on the task at hand.
https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/09/28/remember-the-strzok-page-insurance-policy-exchange-flynn-investigation-case-agent-adds-insight/
Quote:
...The opening of an investigation of General Flynn -- "Crossfire Razor" -- was the "insurance policy" in the event Donald Trump was elected. Page, Papadolopous, and Manafort were not going to be in the Trump Administration -- all had left the campaign by the fall of 2016, so they would not have access to classified information or otherwise be helpful to the Russians. But Comey, McCabe, Strzok, and Page knew Flynn would be in the Administration. Having Crossfire Razor open BEFORE the election meant the FBI could continue investigating the Trump Administration after candidate Trump became President-Elect Trump, and then after the inauguration as well, without having to say they only opened the investigation after Trump's victory.
Agent Barnett said there wasn't much "predicate" to support the investigation of General Flynn, yet on August 15, 2016, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok have already concluded that General Flynn has connections to Russia and Putin that meant he should not have access to classified information.
It is a violation of FBI policy to open a counterintelligence case file on a US Person with no present intention to conduct a counterintelligence investigation of the US Person. It might even be a crime.
And yet that is exactly what Special Agent Barnett says FBI Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok did with regard to General Michael Flynn, decorated U.S. war hero.
He opened a counterintelligence case file on General Flynn, then put it in his "back pocket" just in case it turned out that he needed to have such a file open later on -- depending on who won the election.
That's a problem.
Strzok knows it.
So does his lawyer.
Andy McCabe told him to do it.
Andy McCabe is an idiot.
Peter Strzok is a fool for following that direction....
A different perspective on the 'insurance policy' by Shipwreckedcrew, someone who is becoming my favorite Twitter poster.
drcrinum said:
https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/09/28/remember-the-strzok-page-insurance-policy-exchange-flynn-investigation-case-agent-adds-insight/Quote:
...The opening of an investigation of General Flynn -- "Crossfire Razor" -- was the "insurance policy" in the event Donald Trump was elected. Page, Papadolopous, and Manafort were not going to be in the Trump Administration -- all had left the campaign by the fall of 2016, so they would not have access to classified information or otherwise be helpful to the Russians. But Comey, McCabe, Strzok, and Page knew Flynn would be in the Administration. Having Crossfire Razor open BEFORE the election meant the FBI could continue investigating the Trump Administration after candidate Trump became President-Elect Trump, and then after the inauguration as well, without having to say they only opened the investigation after Trump's victory.
Agent Barnett said there wasn't much "predicate" to support the investigation of General Flynn, yet on August 15, 2016, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok have already concluded that General Flynn has connections to Russia and Putin that meant he should not have access to classified information.
It is a violation of FBI policy to open a counterintelligence case file on a US Person with no present intention to conduct a counterintelligence investigation of the US Person. It might even be a crime.
And yet that is exactly what Special Agent Barnett says FBI Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok did with regard to General Michael Flynn, decorated U.S. war hero.
He opened a counterintelligence case file on General Flynn, then put it in his "back pocket" just in case it turned out that he needed to have such a file open later on -- depending on who won the election.
That's a problem.
Strzok knows it.
So does his lawyer.
Andy McCabe told him to do it.
Andy McCabe is an idiot.
Peter Strzok is a fool for following that direction....
A different perspective on the 'insurance policy' by Shipwreckedcrew, someone who is becoming my favorite witter poster.
Meanwhile, Andy McCabe is suing for wrongful termination.
I've always wondered about this strategy. Is he looking to defame himself? It's really mindboggling to me. Discovery certainly isn't going to be kind to him.Quote:
Meanwhile, Andy McCabe is suing for wrongful termination.
LGB
He believed Team Mueller has successfully buried it. Remember McCabe had a personal grudge against Flynn stemming from a sexual harassment claim by Robin Greitz against McCabe. Flynn backed Robin.Aggie Jurist said:I've always wondered about this strategy. Is he looking to defame himself? It's really mindboggling to me. Discovery certainly isn't going to be kind to him.Quote:
Meanwhile, Andy McCabe is suing for wrongful termination.
Yep. Also, he was stupid. Though the FBI institutionally lies to protect it's remaining 'reputation' the system has preserved so much data it's impossible to respect the 'investigation' into Flynn as legitimate thanks to Barnett (miraculously not being a pathetic liar like the others). Shipwreckedcrew again;
Quote:
The opening of an investigation of General Flynn "Crossfire Razor" was the "insurance policy" in the event Donald Trump was elected. Page, Papadolopous, and Manafort were not going to be in the Trump Administration all had left the campaign by the fall of 2016, so they would not have access to classified information or otherwise be helpful to the Russians. But Comey, McCabe, Strzok, and Page knew Flynn would be in the Administration. Having Crossfire Razor open BEFORE the election meant the FBI could continue investigating the Trump Administration after candidate Trump became President-Elect Trump, and then after the inauguration as well, without having to say they only opened the investigation after Trump's victory.
Agent Barnett said there wasn't much "predicate" to support the investigation of General Flynn, yet on August 15, 2016, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok have already concluded that General Flynn has connections to Russia and Putin that meant he should not have access to classified information.
It is a violation of FBI policy to open a counterintelligence case file on a US Person with no present intention to conduct a counterintelligence investigation of the US Person. It might even be a crime.
And yet that is exactly what Special Agent Barnett says FBI Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok did with regard to General Michael Flynn, decorated U.S. war hero.
He opened a counterintelligence case file on General Flynn, then put it in his "back pocket" just in case it turned out that he needed to have such a file open later on depending on who won the election.
That's a problem.
Strzok knows it.
So does his lawyer.
Andy McCabe told him to do it.
Andy McCabe is an idiot.
Peter Strzok is a fool for following that direction.
Proving once again something that I have said here a few times and my friends connected to the FBI are unhappy about having to grudgingly admit moving up through the ranks of FBI management too often has nothing to do with whether the people being promoted know what they are doing.
"All Volunteer" management results in too many idiots volunteering to be promoted.
Sorry for replying to myself, but Szrtok/Page/McCabe's analysis of Flynn ('he can't have access to classified info" basically), conflicts with the fact that the DIA had in fact renewed his TS security clearance in just the spring of 2016 after he passed the polygraph test etc., and even though DNI Clapper refused to assist/participate in the renewal process.
Those clearances, I believe (but am not sure), are good for 3 years. He'd briefed the CIA about his contacts/communications at the Moscow dinner afterward (it was approved beforehand), and there was no credible reason to think he was a Russian agent in August-January (2016-2017).
Those clearances, I believe (but am not sure), are good for 3 years. He'd briefed the CIA about his contacts/communications at the Moscow dinner afterward (it was approved beforehand), and there was no credible reason to think he was a Russian agent in August-January (2016-2017).
From that Sara Carter article from a year ago.
Yet he never once enforced his Brady order by thrashing Van Grack and possibly throwing him in jail.Quote:
Sullivan set a tentative Dec. 18 sentencing date for Flynn. He told the prosecution and defense that the sentencing date could be moved depending on the outcome of requests for Brady material requested by Powell and how the case will unfold in the upcoming months. Sullivan also noted during the hearing that the Brady order takes precedence over the plea agreement.
Featured Stories
See All
2024-25 Aggies are proving to be a once-in-a-decade team at Texas A&M
by Luke Evangelist
37:09
1h ago
510
Reed Report: Preparing for March Madness with JBR Bracketology
by Luke Evangelist
Expect outside interest in Williams to grow with every Aggie victory
by Olin Buchanan
HunterAggie
Expect outside interest in Williams to grow with every Aggie victory
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
68
tu ag
2026 Oradell (NJ) Bergen Catholic DT Jermaine Kinsler commits to Texas A&M
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
46
aggiedent
Expect outside interest in Williams to grow with every Aggie victory
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
38