Yes, that presumes that Flynn will have all charges dismissed--I can't see that not happening at this point.
Flynn will have a lot to talk about, a lot of payback to dish out, and it will all be directed at Democrats. Think about it. A decorated general whose career was gratuitously destroyed by Leftists of the Deep State--FBI, CIA, DoJ--sworn enemies of President Trump, touring the country and speaking about what the Dems did to his life, his son, etc. Ugly. Very ugly.
And there's another group I hope he takes on--military types speaking out for the Dems, interfering in politics: Now the Generals Speak Up? The Left has trotted them forward to attack Trump, and I definitely want to see Flynn calling them out by name.
Big losers? All Dem candidates, starting with Biden, who was at the Oval Office meetings when the coup was being plotted.
Top questions to come out of the Flynn case, which--remember--goes back to 2014: Obama, Biden, Hillary--What did they know and when did they know it.
Mueller and Weissmann should be in the crosshairs over this, along with many others in the top levels at DoJ and FBI.
Anyone seen or heard from Rod Rosenstein recently? Wanna bet he's been singing like a bird to Barr/Durham? I hope he's done a Mifsud and put it all on tape.
Follow this link for a good Geraldo interview that ends up focusing on 'How High Does It Go?'
Geraldo predicts a 'run' on DC defense attorneys as Durham's probe of Trump-Russia investigators deepens
Here's another really big loser: James Clapper, last heard from urging David Ignatius of the WaPo to take the "kill shot" on Flynn by publishing highly classified information that was leaked to Ignatius. How would you like to go in front of a jury to explain that--urging a "kill shot" on a decorated general who has been put through hell on known to be false charges? Clapper better have something really good to offer Barr/Durham.
And speaking of David Ignatius ...
The media--Big Losers. David Ignatius revealed as a Dem hitman? Wanna bet that's not the last similar revelation.
This will all be playing through 2020.
Until now, I had thought that the Strzok-Page texts were released to the public as revenge for the guilty plea of Michael Flynn. The texts were released on December 2, 2017, one day after Flynn's plea on December 1, 2017.
ReplyDelete(My thinking was based on my reading of Sundance.)
Now it seems, though, that the release of the texts already had been scheduled for December 2 and that Flynn was pressured to plea before that scheduled date for the release. Flynn was pressured to do so because he might change his mind after he became aware of the Strzok-Page texts. That is why the two dates are so close.
(See Powell's filing, page 13, including the footnote.)
I still do not know who decided to release the Strzok-Page texts.
Preparing for the release of the Strzok-Page texts was a big job. There were thousands of texts, which had to be selected, redacted and formatted for the release.
ReplyDeleteThis preparation must have begun several weeks before December 2, 2017, when they were actually released.
During those weeks, Flynn was pressured to plead guilty. Unknown to him, the Strzok-Page texts were scheduled to be released to the public on December 2. Unknown to him, his enemies wanted him to plead guilty before that date.
As it turned out, he was pressured into pleading guilty on December 1 -- just one day before the scheduled release of the Strzok-Page texts.
The coincidence of Flynn's guilty plea and the release of the Strzok-Page texts should be explained by the Justice Department.
* Were the DOJ officials who pressured Flynn oriented toward December 2 as a deadline?
... or ...
* Was the release scheduled for December 2 because the relevant DOJ officials knew already that Flynn would plead guilty on December 1?
Presumably, Rod Rosenstein knew all about this, since he was supervising it all and authorized Team Mueller to go after Flynn's son to coerce the father's plea.
DeleteIf you want DoJ to explain it all, RR might be a good person to put in front of a Grand Jury.
Ruminating about Rosey and some more...
DeleteIts hard to figure out what Rosey was up to and why he got a high five sendoff from Barr and, implicitly at least, from Trump.
FWIW, my best guess is that Rosey has been playing both sides against the middle for a long time...for the whole time he was DAG.
On the one hand, he worked with the Deep State to get Mueller appointed and to consider invoking the 25th amendment. He signed one of the Carter Page FISA applications. He authored the memos expanding Mueller's jurisdiction and, as you say, Mark, authorized Mueller to go after Flynn's son. (That was despicable.)
OTOH, he worked with Trump to fire Comey and, it seems, to release the Strzok-Page texts. And, at the end of the day, the Mueller Report was (believe it or not) a Trump win and Rosey did team up with Barr (under duress?) to squash the Weissmann obstruction gambit.
It will be most interesting to learn the whole Rosey story.
Which puts me in mind to mention one more interesting consequence of the Russia Hoax fiasco. Not only has the Resistance spent tens of millions of taxpayer and Soros dollars to destroy Trump, which may or may not turn out to be money well spent from their perspective, but they have literally destroyed dozens of their own in the process.
Nearly all the 'conspirators' have lost their jobs and those that haven't (Bruce Ohr?) soon will. Unemployment is no fun and some book deals and CNN gigs notwithstanding these deals expire and then you've got to get a job. Which for these guys won't be easy.
When Durham is finished with these guys one way or the other its hard to imagine they'll ever find meaningful work again outside some Soros-funded not-for-profit. They certainly won't be headed to million dollar partnerships at big law firms as they might have planned.
And paying for criminal defense is outrageously expensive. These DC hotshot criminal defense lawyers don't work for free (regardless of ideological affinity) and the top guys have hourly rates in the thousands. Covington & Burling apparently charged Flynn $5 million to engineer his guilty plea. Brennan and Comey's fees may make Flynn's fee look like chicken feed.
Plus the stress of being under criminal investigation and criminal indictment for a period of years is life-changing. Acquitted or convicted, not many emerge from the process intact.
Which leads me to one last thought...Trump's resilience through this situation astounds me. He has been weathering body blows now for over four years and the guy is not only still standing, he is still working, and he is seemingly thriving. Although you have to wonder...However you feel about him he is an extraordinary human being.
New Post just up will give you plenty more to ruminate on! I invite you to repost this comment there.
Deletehttps://meaninginhistory.blogspot.com/2019/10/fascinating-how-long-has-john-durham.html
The release of the Strzok-Page texts has turned out to be a catastrophe for the anti-Trump cabal. You can see how Sidney Powell is using those texts to devastating effect.
ReplyDeleteWho decided to release those texts to the public? And why?
My guess is that Rod Rosenstein made the decision.
I speculate further that Rosenstein saw the release of the texts as a clever way to undermine Andrew McCabe further.
Rosenstein already had begun to undermine McCabe by appointing Robert Mueller to take over the investigation from McCabe. However, McCabe still was the FBI's Acting Director -- still a potential threat to Rosenstein.
Rosenstein perceived that disgracing Peter Strzok and Lisa Page eventually might disgrace McCabe too. Both Strzok and Page were McCabe's proteges.
-----
Christopher Wray became the FBI Director on August 2, 2017, replacing McCabe, who had been Acting Director.
Later that month -- August 2017 -- Strzok was removed from Mueller's staff, because of the texts.
I wonder if those events in August 2017 are related.
I think we need to understand when Congress became aware of those texts and began pushing for them. That's what forced their release. Or, as it turns out, partial and tendentiously redacted release.
DeleteSidney Powell wrote a devastating book about DOJ abuses during the Enron case, and she is a very articulate and media savvy spokeswoman who will not be cowed by the Deep State or their MSM allies. No doubt she intends to followup on her criminal defense work with civil actions as the law allows. If all goes as it should, Flynn will be made whole financially and then some. These developments will also have ramifications on the upcoming Stone trial and possibly even the prior Manafort convictions. All of this, plus Flynn's own public speaking, will bring into focus the extremely serious corruption that has existed at DOJ/FBI/CIA and other federal agencies during Obama's administration. All the Democrat presidential candidates will now have to address these issues moving forward, and now would be a good time to drop out if you are a long-shot and don't want to be tarnished by this debacle. Tulsi has seen the writing on the wall and will jump to a Third Party candidacy very soon.
ReplyDeleteYes, all true. I've been thinking about the Gabbard gambit, and what that means. Will it hurt Dems? Trump?
DeleteI believe that the Deplorables and others on that side - Trump’s side - see Tulsi Gabbard as an outlier Dem - geographically (Hawaii is a world apart from Flyover Country) and politically. And still more a Dem than a Conservative or even a moderate Republican no matter what she says. The Dems have no strong candidate. Wheeling Hillary out will do them no good. Biden will surely be dead meat before Election Day. The midgets are useless. So I believe that if she goes third party, it will hurt the Dems.
DeleteI still can't believe that two high-up FBI agent/lawyer, who no doubt knew better, would be so stupid as to send each other all these incriminating texts. They must know everything is recorded.
ReplyDeleteThey deserve everything coming their way, if only as punishment for this gross stupidity.
The folly of love?
Yeah, this is surely one of those light at the end of the tunnel moments for them. They had lives and threw them away.
DeleteArrogance and hubris. Shared sexual relations was how they found catharsis, an experience that couldn't be shared with their marital partners.
DeleteI never thought there was a real love affair. That they were more joined in a Cause, the prevention of Trump’s gaining the presidency, or his removal if he should succeed. They have to have become drunk on the power they realized they could exercise. Heavy stuff for them… and it was “their secret”. Or so they thought.
DeleteA Vanity Fair article published on December 15, 2017, provides some information about the release of the texts.
ReplyDeleteMy reading of the article is that Rod Rosenstein was scheduled to testify to Congress on Wednesday, December 13. On that date he was supposed to provide to Congress a selection of the Strzok-Page texts.
It's my understanding that the texts were not to be released to the public -- only to the Congressional committee.
However, some time before Rosenstein testified, the texts were leaked to several journalists. I figure that this leak happened on December 2 -- the day after Flynn pleaded guilty and 11 days before Rosenstein testified.
The article indicates further that that the Justice Department (i.e. Rosenstein) decided to leak the texts to the journalists.
[quote; emphasis added]
The DOJ’s choice to publicize the texts was already a subject of scrutiny, but on Thursday department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores acknowledged that some reporters had seen the texts before the DOJ formally invited them to review the documents: “As we understand now, some members of the media had already received copies of the texts,” she said. “But those disclosures were not authorized by the department.”
Jerrold Nadler, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, and two other Democrats, have asked for a full review of the decision to leak the texts to the press. “Who at the Department of Justice approved your decision to invite the press to view these text messages?” they wrote Isgur Flores in a letter Thursday, demanding a full accounting of the review process. “Did you consult with any official at the Office of the Inspector General about sharing these text messages with the press prior to the Department’s doing so? Who attended this media briefing?”
Rosenstein defended the DOJ’s decision during his Wednesday hearing. ...
[end quote]
So, Rosenstein decided to leak the texts, and he leaked them on December 2 -- the day after Flynn pleaded guilty.
Rosenstein was supposed to provide the texts to Congress 11 days later, on December 15, when he appeared to testify.
Furthermore, Rosenstein leaked the texts while foreseeing that Democrats in Congress would object to the release.
Thanks. Now all we need to know is the why behind RR's decision.
DeleteTulsi will harvest most of the moderate Democrats that are appalled by the lawlessness of the DOJ/FBI, the wanton and despicable persecution of Flynn, and the coercion of a guilt plea by threatening his son. Most of this will occur in Red and Purple States, and make it nearly impossible for the Democrats to win any swing states in the national election. More significantly however is the impact on down ballot Senate and House races. They now have no hope of retaking the Senate and will likely lose the House as well. Trump will get to appoint another Supreme Court judge, and that will nullify any future treachery by Roberts. How much longer can the national media continue to hide these factors from widespread public awareness?
ReplyDeleteI feel like what you're seeing is it. It makes sense to me. It's like I'm afraid to wake up from a great dream.
DeleteMakes sense to me, too . The essence of what I believe, amplified and far better expressed. Had I seen it I’d have skipped my comment!
DeleteI just watched Dan Bongino's Oct 25 telecast. He is doing an excellent job pulling together disparate threads of this conspiracy for his audience. His focus today was on John Brennan. Pretty devastating.
ReplyDeleteHere's the YouTube link: https://bongino.com/ep-1096-why-is-john-brennan-melting-down/
Tx. I watched him last night and thought he did a very good job.
DeleteI like that he's stressing the Ukraine-Soros angle--which is key.
DeleteFind it interesting that the NYT's gave Georgie S. a tongue bath just today. It's behind a paywall. I read it for free but when I went back to the site I read it on to pickup the link it had disappeared, but it's out there and makes Georgie look like a Prince-Among-Men. Disgusting.
DeleteTom S.
I use this browser sometimes to beat (some) paywalls. It doesn't beat the WSJ, but it does get around other obstacles. If you start it with a " -g" extension "links -g" it displays more or less like a modern browser.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_(web_browser)