Candidate #1 is Trump.

I thought about just letting you go on and on and let you spin why Candidate 1 was the victim....would have been interesting to say the least :hihi:

I didn’t say candidate #1 was clinton. Two separate statements.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fixed the first part for you, you could try the executive summaries. I put a link and the page numbers in an earlier thread.

As far as Dershowitz goes he's certainly a Trumplican.
If you can find a lawyer other than Rudy who agrees with his theory on Flynn not lying because the FBI already knew the answer and therefore it was not material under section 1001, he probably went to a worse law school than Michael Cohen. Dershowitz doesn't have that excuse.

Here is a little case law for you to explain it, feel free to look up the cases if you need further enlightenment, they are all in casetext.com

United States v. Mercedes, 401 F. App’x 619, 620 (2d Cir. 2010)
(rejecting argument that false statement about citizenship could not have been material because interviewing agent had already “ruled out the possibility of relying on the statement”)

United States v. Moore, 708 F.3d 639, 649 (5th Cir. 2013)
(“A statement can be material even if the agency already knew the answers given by the defendant and even if the receiving agent knows they are false.”)

United States v. LeMaster, 54 F.3d 1224, 1230–31 (6th Cir. 1995)
“It is irrelevant what the agent who heard the statement knew at the time the statement was made. A false statement can be material even if the agent to whom it is made knows that it is false.” (“The fact that the FBI already knew that LeMaster received $6,000 in cash from Spurrier did not affect the materiality of his false statement to the FBI. A false statement 1231 can be material even if the agent to whom it is made knows that it is false.”)

United States v. Whitaker, 848 F.2d 914, 916 (8th Cir. 1988)
(“A false statement 1231 can be material even if the agent to whom it is made knows that it is false.”)

United States v. Goldfine, 538 F.2d 815, 820 (9th Cir. 1976)
(“Darrell Goldfine contends, however, that since the Compliance Investigators knew the answer and were not misled by the falsity, the statement was not materially false. . . . [T]he statement here was clearly material.”)

United States v. Henderson, 893 F.3d 1338, 1351 (11th Cir. 2018)
(“Indeed, a false statement can be material even if the decision maker actually knew or should have known that the statement was false.”)

So you're saying that the material was intended to hurt Trump's campaign?

Opposition research usually is. What’s the problem?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How about releasing Page's name to the media? Is that problematic, to tell the media that a US citizen is a Russian agent, when he still hasn't been charged with anything? What if that was done, specifically to hurt Trump or his campaign? Would that be a problem?

I agree, political opposition research isn't necessarily fabricated. But it should be taken with a grain of salt, not used to suspend the constitutional rights of a US citizen.

good article by Andy McCarthy today Jim

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...-papadopoulos/

I don't know if they ever determined how his name came out, but the initial media reports wasn't that he was a Russian agent but rather that he mad met with suspected Russian agents which I believe is true.

On April 10, 2017, Strzok texted Page: "I had literally just gone to find this phone to tell you I want to talk to you about media leak strategy with DOJ before you go."

Just two days later, Strzok lauded Page's efforts and gave her a heads up that "two articles are coming out, one which is 'worse' than the other about Lisa's 'namesake,' " a reference to Carter Page.

Just one day after Strzok's text to Page, the Washington Post, on April 11, 2017, ran a piece titled "FBI obtained FISA warrant to monitor former Trump advisor Carter Page."


weird...

It's pretty common for news outlets to notify the government about pending articles. They were talking about how the FBI would respond. The IG and I believe even the WSJ looked at this closely and found...

nothing...

this is pretty exciting :kewl:

Joseph diGenova, former U. S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and a former legal counsel to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

"It has been evident from day one that there was a brazen plot to exonerate Hillary Clinton illegally, and then, if she lost the election, to frame Donald Trump. This [Steele] dossier was a knowing part of that. It was created by Hillary Clinton. It was created knowingly by [former CIA Director] John Brennan as part of a scheme to do everything they could to harm Donald Trump.

The problem for Brennan and [former Director of National Intelligence]Clapper and [former FBI Director] Comey and [former FBI General Counsel] Baker and all of them now is, is that the FISA Court has already communicated with the Justice Department about its findings. And their findings are that from more than four years before the election of Donald Trump, there was an illegal spying operation going on by FBI [private] contractors — four of them — to steal personal information, electronic information about Americans and to use it against the Republican Party.

There are going to be indictments. There’s going to be grand juries. John Brennan isn’t going to need one lawyer. He’s going to need five!

There’s another report that everybody has forgotten about that involves James Comey alone. That will be out in two weeks. That report is going to be a bombshell. It’s going to open the investigation on a very high note.

The FISA Court abuse is the center of this entire abuse of governmental power. The Chief Judge of that court [Rosemary M. Collyer] has already ruled that the FBI broke the law and that the people at the head of the [Obama] Justice Department — [former Deputy Attorney General] Sally Yates, John Carlin, the Assistant Attorney General for National Security, all knew about it and lied to the court, the FISA Court, about it.

There is a hero in this entire story, and it’s not a lawyer. All the bad people in this story are lawyers. There’s a hero. His name is Admiral Mike Rogers. He was the head of the National Security Agency. He discovered the illegal spying. He went personally to the FISA Court and briefed the Chief Judge and worked with her for months to uncover the people who did it. The FISA Court has already told the Justice department who lied to that court and that has been given to [Attorney General] Bill Barr already."




this explains why the dems are in full Barr assault mode

you bet it explains their assaults on Barr. They fired at Trump
and missed. Missing can have brutal consequences, that's the gamble they took. I can’t imagine how happy and excited Trump is right
now.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Joseph diGenova? Please make serious posts. You’re going to confuse Jim even more.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he has FAR more credibility than you :wave: