Patterico's Pontifications

10/29/2020

DoJ Accused of Misrepresenting Facts to Judge Sullivan in Flynn Case

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:29 am



I have a few leftover stories from the past few days; blogging everything interesting is tough in an election season. This is one of them.

This seems . . . not good:

The Justice Department is already facing sharp questions from a judge about altering sensitive documents in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Now, two lawyers connected to the case say DOJ has made new mischaracterizations in its attempt to clean up the mess.

The department claimed late Monday that it had consulted with lawyers for former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe and former FBI agent Peter Strzok and confirmed that two sets of handwritten notes — key evidence in Flynn’s case — were valid and free of any alterations.

But correspondence between the two attorneys and DOJ reveal that neither vouched for the accuracy of the documents. In fact, McCabe’s lawyer Michael Bromwich and Strzok’s lawyer Aitan Goelman affirmatively refused to do so, according to a review of their email exchanges with Assistant U.S. Attorney Jocelyn Ballantine.

There certainly seems to be a direct discrepancy here:

“We are unable to certify the authenticity of all of the attachments or the accuracy of the transcriptions,” Goelman wrote to Ballantine Sunday afternoon. “To do so, we would need both more time and access to the original notes, particularly given that U.S. Attorney Jensen’s team has already been caught altering Pete’s notes in two instances.”

Yet in DOJ’s filing, Ballantine said both attorneys had “confirmed” the accuracy of the notes taken by McCabe and Strzok.

“The government reiterates, however, that the content of those exhibits was not altered in any way, as confirmed by attorneys for both former FBI employees,” Ballantine wrote in the filing, which was submitted just before a midnight deadline.

This has the potential to be very, very bad for Ballentine.

Keep in mind: Jocelyn Ballentine is the one lawyer from the original prosecution who stayed on the case after Bill Barr decided to throw it to make Trump happy. The fact that she signed some of the briefs supporting dismissal was trumpeted by the Flynndication crowd as proof that the dismissal motion was totally honest and above-board.

The dismissal motion has always been openly and nakedly corrupt. This is just further evidence of the Government’s dishonesty on behalf of a guy who’s about to get his rear end tossed out of office by the people.

UPDATE: Speaking of DoJ corruption . . .

81 Responses to “DoJ Accused of Misrepresenting Facts to Judge Sullivan in Flynn Case”

  1. This is another example of how the Trump administration is not just corrupt, but incompetent and dishonest as well.

    Any opinion on what’s likely to happen next?

    Time123 (7cca75)

  2. I missed the part where Kevin “viva le resistance” Clinesmith altering a FISA supporting document tainted that process as being “nakedly corrupt.”

    beer ‘n pretzels (042d67)

  3. He has been prosecuted, and he should have been. Do you have anything of substance to add to *this* story, or do you just have trollish whatabouts?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  4. Any opinion on what’s likely to happen next?

    I don’t know for sure but I’m popping popcorn.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  5. I missed the part where Kevin “viva le resistance” Clinesmith altering a FISA supporting document tainted that process as being “nakedly corrupt.”

    beer ‘n pretzels (042d67) — 10/29/2020 @ 8:49 am

    Cool story. do you really care about this kind of behavior, or do you care about things that go against your team?

    Your decision to change the subject immediately suggests an answer. Is it OK that Trump and Barr’s DOJ lied to the court about the subject of the post? Pretty simple question right?

    Dustin (4237e0)

  6. @3: As for this story, I haven’t seen any details as to how the alterations impacted the Flynn case. Nobody has been prosecuted for the alterations, and I haven’t seen criminal intent alleged, so it appears to be a case of negligence. On this we rest an accusation of naked corruption.

    beer ‘n pretzels (042d67)

  7. Marcy Wheeler has more on the alterations.
    Let’s remember: An FBI attorney is being criminally prosecuted for altering an email, and now we know of at least two alterations to McCabe’s and Strzok’s notes.
    The DOJ is practically asking Judge Sullivan to dismiss their motion, and Sullivan has a history (see Senator Stevens) of screwing prosecutors who deal with him in bad faith.

    Paul Montagu (307426)

  8. ……Nobody has been prosecuted for the alterations, and I haven’t seen criminal intent alleged, so it appears to be a case of negligence. On this we rest an accusation of naked corruption.
    I’m sure the Barr Justice Department will get right on it.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  9. “trollish whatabouts?”

    Translation: Noting that my side has been repeatedly caught red-handed doing the very things you accuse me of doing is RUDE and OFFENSIVE

    Haunter Biden (85c67f)

  10. It was a stick note erroneously left on when it was scanned. Talk about making a mountain out of an anthill there… the DOJ corrected that.

    Or, was there any other alleged alterations that I’m missing? I’m not seeing it in any of those links.

    whembly (c30c83)

  11. Nobody has been prosecuted for the alterations, and I haven’t seen criminal intent alleged, so it appears to be a case of negligence. On this we rest an accusation of naked corruption.

    Well, no – the accusation of naked corruption is premised on all the corruption that was already transparently out in the open. Altering evidence to fit a fever-dream narrative that Flynn was set up rather than criminally stupid is just that much more confirmation.

    (Not That) Bill O'Reilly (6bb12a)

  12. Cool story. do you really care about this kind of behavior, or do you care about things that go against your team?

    Right back at you. Are you concerned that FBI officials are lying on an application so they can get the most intrusive surveillance techniques available to the US government – and no defense attorney to plead otherwise.

    Hoi Polloi (15cfac)

  13. “Your decision to change the subject immediately suggests an answer. Is it OK that Trump and Barr’s DOJ lied to the court about the subject of the post? Pretty simple question right?”

    First we have to assume that any lies actually happened, or that Peter Strzok and his lawyers are the type of people to trust when they claim ‘mischaracterization’, or that the judge asking questions is himself above board, or that anything you claim wasn’t already done at higher levels and grander scales previously.

    Moralizing is a fine thing for people who don’t habitually and deceitfully act like they were born yesterday.

    Haunter Biden (c3e629)

  14. The “alterations” were two sticky notes with estimated dates on them put there by the people compiling the material.

    Strozk’s lawyer didn’t claim anything else in the scanned documents was altered in his original complaint to Judge Sullivan.

    The person validating the records is John Brown, the Executive Assistant Director at the FBI in possession of the original documents and responsible for redacting any sensitive information.

    Xmas (df540a)

  15. Altering evidence to fit a fever-dream narrative that Flynn was set up rather than criminally stupid is just that much more confirmation.

    You present nothing to show the alterations were designed to fit that narrative, because you have nothing.

    beer ‘n pretzels (042d67)

  16. Meh.

    Flynn, and god knows how many other corrupt Trump cronies and relatives, will be pardoned in a matter of days.

    Dave (1bb933)

  17. The Turkish bank corrupt, criminal, traitor (that would be Trump) story beneath the fold has a monstrous awesomeness to it, as well, like the hindquarters of an elephant.

    nk (1d9030)

  18. Guess if you can’t gin up an Alfa Bank hoax, taking a Turkish bath will do

    Haunter Biden (4bb7f4)

  19. It was a stick note erroneously left on when it was scanned. Talk about making a mountain out of an anthill there… the DOJ corrected that.

    Or, was there any other alleged alterations that I’m missing? I’m not seeing it in any of those links.

    whembly (c30c83) — 10/29/2020 @ 9:14 am

    That was the last one.

    Judge Sullivan told the DOJ to come back and attest under penalty to perjury that the rest of it was correct.
    The DOJ came back and said they spoke with the lawyers from Strozk and Mccabe and those lawyers said the rest was correct.

    Now those lawyers are denying that the told the DOJ everything was correct.

    If true that makes this a case of perjury by the DOJ lawyer.

    Time123 (7cca75)

  20. “trollish whatabouts?”

    Translation: Noting that my side has been repeatedly caught red-handed doing the very things you accuse me of doing is RUDE and OFFENSIVE

    Haunter Biden (85c67f) — 10/29/2020 @ 9:13 am

    The fact that your unproven conspiracy theories are shared on your FB feed doesn’t mean they’re true.

    Time123 (7cca75)

  21. An attorney’s duty of candor to the court does not require an oath (other than the one he took when he was licensed).

    nk (1d9030)

  22. He has been prosecuted, and he should have been. Do you have anything of substance to add to *this* story, or do you just have trollish whatabouts?

    Patterico (115b1f) — 10/29/2020 @ 8:54 am

    Based on recent evidence the answer is; “No, he does not.”

    Time123 (7cca75)

  23. “Your decision to change the subject immediately suggests an answer. Is it OK that Trump and Barr’s DOJ lied to the court about the subject of the post? Pretty simple question right?”

    First we have to assume that any lies actually happened, or that Peter Strzok and his lawyers are the type of people to trust when they claim ‘mischaracterization’, or that the judge asking questions is himself above board, or that anything you claim wasn’t already done at higher levels and grander scales previously.

    Moralizing is a fine thing for people who don’t habitually and deceitfully act like they were born yesterday.

    Haunter Biden (c3e629) — 10/29/2020 @ 9:18 am

    Your outrage isn’t lining up with the known facts.

    The lawyers for Strzok and McCabe aren’t claiming that the notes are wrong. They’re claiming they never answered the DOJ’s question.

    The lie the DOJ is accused of is that the attorneys told them the notes were correct.

    Time123 (7cca75)

  24. Make America ordure again? It’s hard to keep up with these VPN trolls.

    Anyhow, if Trump was not born yesterday, then why is he in diapers?

    nk (1d9030)

  25. Anyhow, if Biden was not born yesterday, then why is he in diapers?

    Depends– Boy-o Joey turn 78 year old in 22 days.

    FIFY.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  26. Sto lat. (May he attain a hundred years.) — Traditional Polish wish. Greek, too.

    nk (1d9030)

  27. Now, I’m confused. How does it hurt Flynn that the FBI agents won’t say their notes were unaltered? Isn’t alteration of those interview notes part of his defense?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  28. Oh. “particularly given that U.S. Attorney Jensen’s team has already been caught altering Pete’s notes in two instances.”

    This is such a pigfest. Can’t they all lose?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  29. This is why the FBI needs to move away from notes/302s whenever possible and just tape the interview.

    Hoi Polloi (15cfac)

  30. Actually, they have video now.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  31. Not the FBI, of course, but it’s all the rage elsewhere.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  32. For more commentary on Trump’s new impeachable offense, pressuring the DOJ to drop a prosecution of a Turkish bank at a time when the Trump Organization was receiving funds from Turkish real estate, here’s a another article:

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/10/trump-turkey-bank-scandal-corruption-erdogan-halkbank-conflict-interest.html

    Victor (00af29)

  33. Now, I’m confused. How does it hurt Flynn that the FBI agents won’t say their notes were unaltered? Isn’t alteration of those interview notes part of his defense?

    Kevin M (ab1c11) — 10/29/2020 @ 10:44 am

    it doesn’t directly.
    indirectly it makes the DOJ’s current position look sketchy because they appear to lying to the judge about some things. Since the accusation is that Flynn is getting special treatment for political reasons.

    Time123 (7cca75)

  34. @32, I read that.

    The president saying that “This criminal investigation into a foreign bank for allegedly violating US sanctions isn’t in the US national security interest for external reasons.
    ” doesn’t on it’s face appear to be an abuse of power or an impeachable event.

    If you can show that he was doing it for personal reasons related to his business interests in Turkey I’d feel otherwise.

    I hope the next congress passes some anti-corruption laws based on the Emoluments Clause to prevent these types of questions in the future.

    Time123 (7cca75)

  35. Not the FBI, of course, but it’s all the rage elsewhere.

    Kevin M (ab1c11) — 10/29/2020 @ 10:54 am

    I’ve heard that many cellular telephones now have the ability to tape not only voice, but video. Who knew?

    Hoi Polloi (15cfac)

  36. @35, it would have been a *great* reform for Trump / Barr to insist that agents record interviews, or that false statements charges only be filed when the lie deceived the agents.

    But they didn’t.
    They could have, but the didn’t.

    Time123 (7cca75)

  37. @Patterico –

    If a defendant’s attorney had been caught out doing similar in a federal case back in Before-Time, what would the likely consequences?

    john (cd2753)

  38. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 10/29/2020 @ 10:44 am

    Now, I’m confused. How does it hurt Flynn that the FBI agents won’t say their notes were unaltered? Isn’t alteration of those interview notes part of his defense?

    I’m of the opinion that it’s possible for the DOJ to have been full of **** when they prosecuted Flynn initially and also be full of **** now that they’re trying to back the truck up. I’m also of the opinion that it’s possible Flynn is dirty and this prosecution was dirty. It’s also possible these attorneys for Strzok and McCabe are lying because they are both dirty.

    This thing went off the rails from the start since the goal wasn’t to get a prosecution on Flynn as much as it was to sling dirt on Trump.

    frosty (f27e97)

  39. But they didn’t.
    They could have, but the didn’t.

    Time123 (7cca75) — 10/29/2020 @ 12:09 pm

    Trump was not involved in the interview of Flynn. He didn’t even know about it. In fact, if I do recall, the FBI agents made it seem to Flynn that the interview was no big deal. So Flynn didn’t even tell the White House attorneys.

    I doubt Barr knew about it, either. Heck, he wasn’t even AG at the time of the interview.

    Hoi Polloi (15cfac)

  40. Time123 (7cca75) — 10/29/2020 @ 11:27 am

    I hope the next congress passes some anti-corruption laws based on the Emoluments Clause to prevent these types of questions in the future.

    Focusing on the emoluments clause is a waste of time and isn’t about corruption. It’s unlikely we’ll ever have another POTUS where this is an issue. If you’re really worried about corruption it would better to focus on things like foreign no interest unsecured loans used to start private equity firms in communist countries, money held in foreign accounts, disclosure rules about business deals both foreign and domestic, or good old fashioned insider trading.

    frosty (f27e97)

  41. or good old fashioned insider trading.

    But how are politicians supposed to get rich?

    Hoi Polloi (15cfac)

  42. Hoi Polloi (15cfac) — 10/29/2020 @ 1:13 pm

    None of the matters because it’s Trump’s DOJ. He’s personally and directly responsible for and involved in every single aspect of the DOJ and every single member of the DOJ does only those things he’s explicitly approved. If a janitor forgets to put a caution sign out for a slippery floor at an FBI office the fact that Trump isn’t personally liable for any injuries that result is just proof of the unfathomable depths of corruption of his administration.

    frosty (f27e97)

  43. This is why the FBI needs to move away from notes/302s whenever possible and just tape the interview.

    Hoi Polloi (15cfac) — 10/29/2020 @ 10:51 am

    Oh yeah for sure. Blows my minds they don’t do that. I interrogated people before and after body cameras were policy. It is safer and easier to use the camera. You can review what you recall happening, and it is really interesting how often our memory is a bit off, even with the best intentions, a little misunderstanding and imagination can really lead to mistakes. I think all interrogations and interviews with law enforcement should be recorded, and I’d go a step further and say the person writing any kind of significant report about it should be required to watch the video before they submit it, just in case. The quality of police reports from the cops who do review the video, versus the ones who assume they have a handle on it, are quite a bit different.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  44. None of the matters because it’s Trump’s DOJ. He’s personally and directly responsible for and involved in every single aspect of the DOJ and every single member of the DOJ does only those things he’s explicitly approved. If a janitor forgets to put a caution sign out for a slippery floor at an FBI office the fact that Trump isn’t personally liable for any injuries that result is just proof of the unfathomable depths of corruption of his administration.

    Getting warmed up for the Biden Administration, are you?

    (That is essentially the same charge made against Obama in regard to Fast & Furious, Lois Lerner, Benghazi, etc; the main difference being that Obama didn’t publicly goad his AG and FBI director to undertake political prosecutions and investigations of his opponents almost daily)

    Dave (1bb933)

  45. According to DOJ “sources”, the FBI opened a criminal investigation into Hunter and associates for FARA and money laundering in 2019 that’s still ongoing.

    I see twitter folks losing their minds because NOW this is coming out with 5 days left till election day.

    Um… these DOJ “sources” need to keep their traps shut.

    Either indict or shaddup.

    [pantomiming air quotes] These “bombshells” from unnamed sources has cause incalculable damage in the political sphere.

    whembly (c30c83)

  46. @45 Oops, forgot the tweet:

    @JamesRosenTV
    · 34m
    EXCLUSIVE: A @TheJusticeDept official confirms that in 2019, the @FBI opened up a criminal investigation into “Hunter Biden and his associates,” focused on allegations of money-laundering, and that it remains open and active today. More very soon on your @WeAreSinclair stations.

    whembly (c30c83)

  47. @16. Congrats Dave— good guess; you’ve been right before: with the regularity of a total solar eclipse across North America 😉 :

    I think Allahpundit is right – anonymity is a handy way to conceal the fact that you’re assistant to the deputy whatever, while making people think maybe you’re a cabinet member or the vice president.

    I’ve seen several people say that “no good can come of this” (Allahpundit was one of them), but I disagree.

    By making Trump even more isolated and paranoid and hostile, suspicious of everyone around him, and more determined to go his own way, there is an increasing chance that he’ll lash out and do something (or try to do something) that will get him removed from office.
    Dave (445e97) — 9/5/2018 @ 8:08 pm

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  48. good guess; you’ve been right before: with the regularity of a total solar eclipse across North America 😉 :

    Coming from the bold predictor that the outcome of the election is that Trump wins or Biden wins and is out of office in a few years.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  49. EXCLUSIVE: A @TheJusticeDept official confirms that in 2019, the @FBI opened up a criminal investigation into “Hunter Biden and his associates,” focused on allegations of money-laundering, and that it remains open and active today. More very soon on your @WeAreSinclair stations.

    whembly (c30c83) — 10/29/2020 @ 3:05 pm

    Given the post is about the DOJ being real shady apparently to help Trump out, who cares?

    Dustin (4237e0)

  50. Dave (1bb933) — 10/29/2020 @ 2:12 pm

    By my calculations we were ~3.8745 posts away from a comment like this being posted by any one of a handful of people. The only difference between mine and the usual one is the sarcasm.

    That is essentially the same charge made against Obama … the main difference being that Obama didn’t publicly goad his AG and FBI director to undertake political prosecutions and investigations of his opponents almost daily

    Yes. He didn’t need to do it publicly or daily. It was baked in.

    frosty (f27e97)

  51. I lost track of how many times I’ve offered Deezy-eska the opportunity to put his money where his facial sphincter is.

    Now I’m tempted to wager every cent I have on Trump in the betting markets.

    My thinking is: if Trump loses, everything will be OK. In the relatively unlikely event I manage to live to a ripe old age, I’ll still have a pension, the condo in AZ that my mom left, and social security. Maybe I’ll have to do tutoring or something to supplement my income and make up for the lost savings.

    And if Trump wins, I’ll be able to go out in proper Hunter Biden style, with all the trimmings, well before Inauguration Day.

    😀

    Dave (1bb933)

  52. @50

    That is essentially the same charge made against Obama … the main difference being that Obama didn’t publicly goad his AG and FBI director to undertake political prosecutions and investigations of his opponents almost daily

    Yes. He didn’t need to do it publicly or daily. It was baked in.

    frosty (f27e97) — 10/29/2020 @ 3:31 pm

    Indeed… Eric Holder literally said he was Obama’s wingman.

    Had Barr said that of Trump, I’m sure some of ya’ll would be rolling out the guillotine.

    whembly (c30c83)

  53. Trump has more trouble with his AGs than he has with his doxies. Where’s his Roy Cohn?

    nk (1d9030)

  54. @49

    Given the post is about the DOJ being real shady apparently to help Trump out, who cares?

    Dustin (4237e0) — 10/29/2020 @ 3:28 pm

    The cognitive dissonance you put on display on near daily basis is amazing.

    Here, you have the Bidens literally doing (credibly alleged) what you claim that the Trump’s are doing, and…you.don’t.care!

    You don’t need to pick and choose Dustin.

    It’s okay to not vote for Trump for “x” reasons.

    But, that doesn’t mean Biden is any better.

    whembly (c30c83)

  55. Here, you have the Bidens literally doing (credibly alleged) what you claim that the Trump’s are doing, and…you.don’t.care!

    Well, no, not exactly. Right Wing Radio has one tweet about one anonymous source who could be the janitor at a DOJ cafeteria or a retweet from 8Chan, and the NYT story has John Bolton and a host of US Attorneys. Right Wing Radio talks about an investigation and the NYT story talks about facts and indictments.

    nk (1d9030)

  56. @51. Davey, you just don’t get it: never bet against yourself.

    It’s gonna be a win/win– whoever wins!

    Glorious!

    ___

    @48. See above, Dustin.

    Double Glorious!!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  57. Where’s his Roy Cohn?

    Star dust.

    “He’s dead, Jim.”- Dr. Leonard McCoy [DeForest Kelley] almost any episode,’Star Trek’ NBC TV 1966-69.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  58. EXCLUSIVE: A @TheJusticeDept official confirms that in 2019, the @FBI opened up a criminal investigation into “Hunter Biden and his associates,” focused on allegations of money-laundering, and that it remains open and active today. More very soon on your @WeAreSinclair stations.

    whembly (c30c83) — 10/29/2020 @ 3:05 pm

    That fits with what the New York Post reported last Friday )amd makes things clearer to me)

    It’s very simple. The computer repairman called the FBI during the impeachment inquiry (and maybe that’s when he contacted Senator Mike Lee, who sluffed him off)

    They talked and the FBI said it couldn’t take it without a subpoena. The FBI decided that the allegations indicated possible money laundering, but without any connection to any known other crime. It was just all this money floating around and no clear business purpose the computer repairman could understand. The most logical thing to find would be some kind of tax evasion by somebody, but apparently they didn’t find any of that. They are keeping the case open in case anything new comes in. If they closed the case, thhey’d have to return the broken laptop and the external hard drive. (the FBI never understood that the computer repairman had a complete copy of all the data files he retriebved from the Mac – I mean not the operating system.

    https://nypost.com/2020/10/21/hunter-biden-laptop-linked-to-fbi-money-laundering-probe-report

    The documents were signed by FBI Special Agent Joshua Wilson, who did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment.

    One document was designated as an FBI “Receipt for Property” form, which details the bureau’s interactions with the owner of “The Mac Shop” who reported the laptop’s contents to authorities.

    The document has a “Case ID” section, which is filled in with a handwritten number: 272D-BA-3065729.

    According to multiple officials, and the FBI’s website, “272” is the bureau’s classification for money laundering, while “272D” refers to “Money Laundering, Unknown SUA [Specified Unlawful Activity]—White Collar Crime Program.”

    One government source said “272D” mean “transnational or blanket,” while “BA” means the case was opened in the FBI’s Baltimore office, which covers Wilmington, Del., where the subpoena was executed….

    ….Another document obtained by Fox News was a subpoena sent to the whistleblower, John Paul Mac Issac, to testify before US District Court in Delaware on Dec. 9, 2019.

    News that the criminal case would have been opened prior to Isaac’s subpoena, meaning it was likely the laptop and hard drive contained a large amount of evidence.

    The Biden campaign on Wednesday pushed back on the claims that Rudy Giuliani provided them with emails belonging to Hunter Biden first reported by The Post last week.

    “The Attorney General of Delaware’s office indicated that the FBI has ‘ongoing investigations regarding the veracity of this entire story,’” Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement.

    “And it would be unsurprising for an investigation of a disinformation action involving Rudy Giuliani and those assisting him to involve questions about money laundering, especially since there are other documented inquiries into his dealings.”

    Not so, of course. The international bank transfers didn’t concern Rudy Giuliani. And Giuliani didn’t have anything to do with that drive or its contents, at that time. He was contacted in August. Joe Biden should have known by that time that his son really did leave a laptop and an external hard drive behind in Delaware which he never picked up. It would be a stretch to think that instead maybe Hunter’s icloud account waa hacked by the Russians and given to Giuliani through some intermediary.

    This has some pictures of documents proving the backstory is real:

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/laptop-hunter-biden-linked-fbi-money-laundering-probe

    Sammy Finkelman (a69e24)

  59. @55 Bobulinski is not anonymous. He has actual receipts.

    whembly (c30c83)

  60. Remember the days when we had to take everything Vindman said as unimpeachable truth because he wore a uniform? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

    frosty (f27e97)

  61. Under oath, in that uniform, in front of Congress, subject to both penalties for perjury to Congress and discipline under the UCMJ, had a little something to do with it, too.

    What do we have from Bobulinski besides a picture of him “looking good” in a Navy ensign’s dress whites, and from how long ago is that?

    nk (1d9030)

  62. @61 Way to prove frosty’s point.

    whembly (c30c83)

  63. @62 Furthermore, Bobuliski had actual evidence that those who harped the Trump Russian Collusion Hoax™ incessantly wished they had.

    whembly (c30c83)

  64. But they didn’t.
    They could have, but the didn’t.

    Yes, and this could be the epitaph for the administration. They are so “bull in a china shop” that they can’t just buy the china, they have to smash it. It comes from not only not knowing how things work, but not caring much.

    It suggests that the ability of the President to deal with complex issues is minimal. There’s a word for that.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  65. @60.Remember the days when we had to take everything Vindman said as unimpeachable truth because he wore a uniform? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

    So does Cracker Jack; guess Roger Clemens shudda worn his uniform— w/spikes! 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  66. @59. The Bidens are in their element; It’s ‘doom and gloom’ time; Halloween Week is the ‘trick or treat’ time for Swamp Creatures, cadavers and the walking dead.

    Remember, Zombie Joe turns 78 years old in just 22 days. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  67. nk (1d9030) — 10/29/2020 @ 6:03 pm

    Yea. That’s a good way to remember it. All of the claims of unimpeachable truth happened after he wore his uniform to testify. Not accurate but it makes for a better story.

    frosty (f27e97)

  68. Dustin (4237e0) — 10/29/2020 @ 3:27 pm

    the bold predictor that the outcome of the election is that Trump wins or Biden wins and is out of office in a few years.

    Well, there could be another outcome.

    The election goes into extra innings and control of the Senate too.

    The Senate splits 50-50 after a runoff in Georgia and Biden carries Michigan, Wisconsin and Arizona and all the other Electoral votes Hillary Clinton got in 2016, but loses Pennsylvania in a cliffhanger caused by late arriving absentee votes not counting.

    Faithless electors are avoided, or none cast votes for the opposing major party candidate.

    The election is thrown into the House of Representatives because nobody gets more than 269 Electoral votes but the House can’t decide because it is divided closely enough so that no candidate gets the votes of 26 states (some states also can be evenly divided, like Pennsylvania is now, and not vote.)

    Note: While a majority of the number of states is needed to choose a candidate, only a plurality is needed in each state’s delegation yo decide its vote.

    The way it works out is that there are 3 to 7 key House members who, with a switch of their votes could make Joe Biden president, but they want some changes and Nancy Pelosi refuses to agree to the slightest change in the House rules, even as a figleaf. She offers to let them become Democrats and acquire some seniority though. but none take her up on the offer because they would lose reelection, and there’s time.

    Meanwhile the Senate faces a deadline of January 20 when Mike Pence’s term ends, and Mitch McConnell maneuvers a vote for Vice President in which Mike Pence casts the tie breaking vote for Mike Pence. Mitch McConnell warns that if they don’t do this thing, Nancy Pelosi will become Acting President and fire everybody. As well as revoke regulations and sign dozens of executive orders.

    At noon on January 20 Mike Pence is sworn in as Vice President and nobody is sworn in as president. Per Section 3 of the 20th amendment – Hey what’s does that mean? – it looks like an incomplete sentence!

    https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/full-text

    20th Amendment

    …Section 3

    If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; /b> and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

    Wait, that’s clear. It’s the copy of the constitution that’s in the 1983 Information Please Book of United States Facts that’s garbled.

    That’s the second place I’ve found a garbled text of the United States constitution. For years, the most common copy of the constitution on computer bulletin boards, dating from the 1980s had the Tenth amendment garbled.

    Mike Pence declares himself Acting President but indicates he is prepared to declare himself president or come up with some argument that it is too late for the House to choose, should the House pick Biden. If it’s thrown into court Justice Kavanaugh and others will have to decide.

    Nobody actually expects them to act in a partisan manner.

    Acting President Pence installs himself in the Oval Office and gives Donald Trump a small office, indicating he will listen to him whenever possible.

    He knows that at any moment any one of 3 to 5 Republicans could make Joe Biden president and throw them both out of the White House.

    But Kamala Harris stays in the Senate because the election of Mike Pence as Vice President was final.

    On March 17 (St. Patrick’s Day) the House finally votes to make Joe Biden president. although some Republicans, like in Utah maybe, were holding out for whoever came in third.

    Sammy Finkelman (a69e24)

  69. But, that doesn’t mean Biden is any better.

    whembly (c30c83) — 10/29/2020 @ 4:33 pm

    I think he’s rather obviously better. He is a poor candidate. I disagree with him on a lot of stuff and am not impressed with much about him as a leader or a man.

    But he’s not extremely awful.

    Obviously some of y’all don’t see it that way, and you guys are clearly intelligent people. That’s why we have elections I suppose.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  70. @55 Bobulinski is not anonymous. He has actual receipts.

    whembly (c30c83) — 10/29/2020 @ 5:10 pm

    What he lacks is any credibility. He’s a guy who admits he was part of extremely shady stuff despite being trusted. Easily blackmailed.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  71. @70 His documents, texts and emails gives him credibility as he’s not pulling it out of his arse, or caveating behind anonymous sources. HE. IS. A. SOURCE!

    whembly (c30c83)

  72. I think he’s rather obviously better.

    That is quite an understatement.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  73. Should he win, before he even woud start the hardest job in the world [aside from motherhood] on January 20, 2021, Joe Biden would be over 78 years.

    Check out the ages of the dudes below and their ages when they passed away– most were out of office after serving and still younger than Biden would be starting the gig:

    George Washington, dead at 67.
    Thomas Jefferson, dead at 83.
    John Adams dead at 90.
    James Monroe, dead at 73.
    James Madison, dead at 85.
    William Henry Harrison, dead at 68.
    Andrew Jackson, dead at 78.
    John Quincy Adams, dead at 80.
    James K. Polk, dead at 53.
    Zachary Taylor, dead at 65.
    John Tyler, dead at 71.
    Martin Van Buren, dead at 79.
    Abraham Lincoln, dead at 56.
    James Buchanan, dead at 77.
    Franklin Pierce, dead at 64.
    Millard Fillmore, dead at 74.
    Andrew Johnson, dead at 66.
    James A. Garfield, dead at 49.
    Ulysses S. Grant, dead at 63.
    Chester A. Arthur, dead at 57.
    Rutherford B. Hayes, dead at 70.
    Benjamin Harrison, dead at 67.
    William McKinley, dead at 58.
    Grover Cleveland, dead at 71.
    Theodore Roosevelt, dead at 60.
    Warren G. Harding, dead at 57.
    Woodrow Wilson, dead at 67.
    William Howard Taft, dead at 72.
    Calvin Coolidge, dead at 60.
    Franklin D. Roosevelt, dead at 63.
    John F. Kennedy, dead at 46.
    Herbert Hoover, dead at 90.
    Dwight D. Eisenhower, dead at 78.
    Harry S. Truman, dead at 88.
    Lyndon B. Johnson, dead at 64.
    Richard Nixon, dead at 81.
    Ronald Reagan, dead at 93
    Gerald Ford, dead at 93.
    George H. W. Bush, dead at 94. – source, wikideadpesidents

    At 78, to start as a POTUS, Biden would be too damn too old for the gig.

    Should he win, expect a President Harris in your future.

    Spooky.
    Frightening.
    Happy Halloween.

    “Hey, Boo!” – ‘Scout’ Finch [Mary Badham] ‘To Kill A Mockingbird’ 1962

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  74. I don’t know about anybody else, but the Trump Traveling Show’s repertoire has always been pretty obvious. It picks a theme, it gets its media friends like Fox, and Salem, and Sinclair to promote it, whines that other media are not giving it legs, runs it for as long as it draws, and then switches to another.

    Right now, it’s Hunter Biden, complete with Senate Trump-gerbil hearings why Facebook, Twitter, and Google are not playing along. Here’s a question to Mr. Senator Ted Cruz: Instead of Mr. Jack Dorsey, why didn’t you subpoena Mr. Tony Bubolinski?

    nk (1d9030)

  75. DCSCA, You listed (or rather obtained a list) of presidents in their order of death, not in the order of when they were president, or when they were born. I noticed this when I saw William Henry Harrison listed before Andrew Jackson.

    It even has Thomas Jeferson before John Adams, even though they doed on the same day, hours apart and unknown to each other (John Adams said Thomas Jefferson still lives, but he was wrong)

    Before the telegraph in 1844 (not counting such shortcuts as flags, or fires) the speed of communication was not faster than the speed of travel.)

    Sammy Finkelman (a69e24)

  76. Subpoena the big guy and his corrupt clan

    mg (8cbc69)

  77. @55 Bobulinski is not anonymous. He has actual receipts.

    whembly (c30c83) — 10/29/2020 @ 5:10 pm

    What he lacks is any credibility. He’s a guy who admits he was part of extremely shady stuff despite being trusted. Easily blackmailed.

    Dustin (4237e0) — 10/29/2020 @ 6:45 pm

    @70 His documents, texts and emails gives him credibility as he’s not pulling it out of his arse, or caveating behind anonymous sources. HE. IS. A. SOURCE!

    whembly (c30c83) — 10/29/2020 @ 6:51 pm

    So far here’s what I’ve seen alleged based on evidence.

    -Hunter is corrupt and was trying to leverage his family name for profit in 2017. This is clearly true.
    -Hunter Biden wanted to cut Joe in for a part of the profit. This is probably true based on emails.
    -Joe Biden was introduced to Hunter’s business partner, Tony B. At a party in 2017. Based on Tony B’s statements, which seem credible, this is likely true.
    -Joe Biden was not formally part of any business venture with Hunter. Based on WSJ report this is probably true.

    -Joe Biden didn’t make any income from a Hunter Biden business venture. Based on WSJ report this is probably true.

    -The FBI has looked into this and so far not found any illegal activity. Likely true based on news report.

    I’m 100% in on Hunter being corrupt. But I haven’t see Tony B allege
    -Joe made any money from this.
    -Joe was involved in this plan.
    -Joe made any commitment, explicit or implied, about being willing to help in the future with this plan.
    From what I’ve read of his interview the meeting was a casual introduction at a party. I’ve seen him talk about the fact that they met, I haven’t seen him review what they talked about.

    Also, except for Tony B. the information is not coming from credible sources which makes me hesitant to draw conclusions.

    I know you’re contrasting this with the Russia investigation so I’ll list a few key differences.

    1. The hack of the DNC was a crime. Based on credible evidence Russia was responsible for the hack.
    2. A member of the trump campaign told a source the campaign was working with Russia.
    3. Paul Manafort was Trump’s campaign manager.
    4. Trump’s many strange public statements about Russia and the hack.
    5. TRUMP FIRED THE HEAD OF THE FBI AND STATED ON TV THAT HE DID IT TO STOP THE INVESTIGATION.

    So, what crime to you feel has been committed? What evidence do you have?
    What ethical lapse do you feel Joe Biden (not Hunter) has committed? Based on what evidence?

    I’m in that Joe’s family benefited from his position. That’s typical swampy behavior. Trump and his family are far worse in that regard, and many others, so it doesn’t change my decision to reluctantly vote for Joe.

    Time123 (69b2fc)

  78. Remember the days when we had to take everything Vindman said as unimpeachable truth because he wore a uniform? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

    frosty (f27e97) — 10/29/2020 @ 5:45 pm

    What has Tony B said that shows a crime or ethical lapse on the part of Joe?

    Time123 (69b2fc)

  79. But they didn’t.
    They could have, but the didn’t.

    Time123 (7cca75) — 10/29/2020 @ 12:09 pm

    Trump was not involved in the interview of Flynn. He didn’t even know about it. In fact, if I do recall, the FBI agents made it seem to Flynn that the interview was no big deal. So Flynn didn’t even tell the White House attorneys.

    I doubt Barr knew about it, either. Heck, he wasn’t even AG at the time of the interview.

    Hoi Polloi (15cfac) — 10/29/2020 @ 1:13 pm

    You misunderstood me. I don’t want trump to make the system better for his friends. I want him to take the specific things he feels were unfair, understand why the systems permits and requires those, fix the system so the don’t happen in the future. Otherwise it’s not about fairness, it’s just about special treatment.

    Time123 (69b2fc)

  80. Dave (1bb933) — 10/29/2020 @ 2:12 pm

    By my calculations we were ~3.8745 posts away from a comment like this being posted by any one of a handful of people. The only difference between mine and the usual one is the sarcasm.

    That is essentially the same charge made against Obama … the main difference being that Obama didn’t publicly goad his AG and FBI director to undertake political prosecutions and investigations of his opponents almost daily

    Yes. He didn’t need to do it publicly or daily. It was baked in.

    frosty (f27e97) — 10/29/2020 @ 3:31 pm

    Frosty, you’re using things you think Obama did, but can’t prove, to justify Trump openly doing it. Additionally, Trump has been president for 3 years and made investigating his enemies a large part of his 2016 campaign. I have to assume they looked. In several cases we know they did and we haven’t found evidence of what you allege.

    Time123 (69b2fc)

  81. Otherwise it’s not about fairness, it’s just about special treatment.

    Given his upbringing and history, one can at least understand why Trump sees them as one and the same.

    (Not That) Bill O'Reilly (6bb12a)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3495 secs.