Looks Like the Trump Admin is Bringing Dark Secrets to The Light

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You don’t get somebody to lie. They choose to do it. There’s nothing wrong with investigators asking questions that leave that choice on the table. Flynn made the choice to lie. Yet you all are trying to excuse it. Pathetic

The "choice" given to defendants by strong arming prosecutors and investigators may not be one made
with free will but by coercion. Republicans demand interviews with FBI's Priestap, Pientka after bombshell Michael Flynn revelations

You consistently act as though defendants always have a free choice whether to lie or not.
Either you are stupid, because you've been told otherwise over and over again, or you are completely dishonest and unethical.

Which is it? Stupid? Or a liar?

I’m not talking about every defendant always.

Neither am I.

I’m talking about Flynn in this specific situation.

So am I.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Top FBI officials discussed the possibility of prosecuting retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn for lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians as agents planned how to conduct their interview of the Trump national security adviser, newly unsealed notes.

I wonder if Flynn will even be pardon at all by Trump?

NO need... Flynn has been exonerated...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Withholding exculpatory evidence is not fine. What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

Why not?

Because it was an internal memo. I thought you were a prosecutor. You don’t know this?

Because it was an internal memo.

An internal memo, a week after the phone call, saying …...

"The absence of any derogatory information or lead information from these logical sources reduce the number of investigative avenues and techniques to pursue. Per the direction of FBI management, Crossfire Razor was not interviewed as part of the case closing procedure. The FBI is closing this investigation," the agent wrote on Jan. 4, 2017.

That's exculpatory. You don't know this?

 

[Slade3200]

You don’t get somebody to lie. They choose to do it. There’s nothing wrong with investigators asking questions that leave that choice on the table. Flynn made the choice to lie. Yet you all are trying to excuse it. Pathetic

The "choice" given to defendants by strong arming prosecutors and investigators may not be one made
with free will but by coercion. Republicans demand interviews with FBI's Priestap, Pientka after bombshell Michael Flynn revelations

You consistently act as though defendants always have a free choice whether to lie or not.
Either you are stupid, because you've been told otherwise over and over again, or you are completely dishonest and unethical.

Which is it? Stupid? Or a liar?

I’m not talking about every defendant always.

Neither am I.

I’m talking about Flynn in this specific situation.

So am I.

You literally just said this “You consistently act as though defendants always have a free choice whether to lie or not.” So no you were speaking generally and specificly. Ok I’m done wasting my time. It was fun owning you for a while but now it’s getting boring

 

[Slade3200]

Withholding exculpatory evidence is not fine. What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

Why not?

Because it was an internal memo. I thought you were a prosecutor. You don’t know this?

Because it was an internal memo.

An internal memo, a week after the phone call, saying …...

"The absence of any derogatory information or lead information from these logical sources reduce the number of investigative avenues and techniques to pursue. Per the direction of FBI management, Crossfire Razor was not interviewed as part of the case closing procedure. The FBI is closing this investigation," the agent wrote on Jan. 4, 2017.

That's exculpatory. You don't know this?

Those communications are internal deliberations, not public record to be shared in court. Are you high?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Probably just shouldn’t lie to the FBI then. It’s not that hard

Worked for Hillary Clinton. Sally Yates lies under oath. User Clip: Yates LIES under oath
You don't mind lies at all. You lie yourself all the time. You back liars. Why you hold a grudge against Michael Flynn is a mystery except your tiny brain is fixated on it.

Easy - Can it be said that Flynn was a piece within the Domino structure in which they wanted to set up in a precise order, otherwise in hopes that the rest would fall, thus eventually getting to Trump their ultimate prize if pushed Flynn hard enough in the line up ???

Yes that could be said. Just like how the street guys are used to get the mob boss. If Trump was dirty then that would definitely be a tactic that would be considered. Is that kind of a tactic illegal/unethical?

Both if the ultimate target was innocent, and the ploy was purely political.

The ultimate target as you insist on calling it was just handed the keys tot he most powerful job in the world while being illegally Supported by a foreign government and was constantly lying to the American people about having contacts with that foreign government. Had Trump been honest and upfront about the Russian contacts and things went down the same way then I’d totally agree with you... but it was the lying, both with Trump and Flynn that warrants suspicion and investigation.

while being illegally Supported by a foreign government

Weaponized memes, very powerful!

and was constantly lying to the American people about having contacts with that foreign government.

Which illegal contacts were there?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And how Flynn fired his shitty lawyers Covington Burling (who told Flynn just to plead guilty to everything and hope for mercy from the system....which was the worst advice ever) and brought on board someone who fought the DOJ for a living and that made all the difference.

And that firm has a major partner by the name of ERIC HOLDER, who was Obama's right hand man at removing Flynn. Thier advice was not in Flynn's interests.

Flynn was fired by Trump and arrested by Trumps FBI/DoJ and prosecuted over the past three years by directors appointed by Trump. What were you saying about Obama and Holder again?

Interesting that the information was provided by Oabama's FBI and his deep state plants. Now that info has been exposed as a lie and fraud. ITs so bad they had to MANUFACTURE the lies. Guess who is no longer employed in Trumps FBI and DOJ? These people are looking at very long prison sentences.. IF they find this was indeed a Coup D'e Tat they need to swing from gallows.

That statement was straight out of your asshole. How do I know? Because it smells like shit. I dont care if the “information came from Obama“... if new Trump people have been in charge for the past 3 YEARS then they are big boys and they can assess for themselves... not that there Is any legitimacy to your claim. I just like to show how idiotic your logic is even if what you were saying is true.

what’s different about NOW you may ask... well I appreciate the question. Well it’s campaign season with an election around the corner. Let’s just assume that Flynn covered for Trump by lying about talking sanctions with Russia and now it is Trumps time to either pardon or get his lackies to clear Flynn... I know I know totally crazy theory isnt it... or is it???

you've got being a little bitch down pat.. Now lets look at the facts recently exposed.

1. Obama ordered and orchestrated the Coup D'e Tat. From the very beginning he was the one who opened the investigation into Flynn and three others. The FBI, NSA, and DOJ were complicit.

2. We now know the FBI found no "negative information" on Flynn and was about to close the case when Strozk was ordered to manufacture a crime that would support their narrative.

3. The Dossier, bought and paid for by Clinton was nothing more than hersay and Russian propognada. Not even Steel would stand behind it veracity and he wrote it. Now we know that it was the SOLE item used in the FISA warrants and the fraud commited on the court as it was never verified or verifiable and the FBI knew it was a lie before the first FISA warrant was asked for.

4. The Mueller investigation also knew, the day that he was seated, that all the pretexts for his job had been shown falsified and that no collusion existed, ever! There was no reason for the Mueller office of Special Counsel and they were 100% aware of it.

The whole thing was a lie and an attempt to unseat a duly elected president, A Coup D'e Tat... Another 2,600 pages is coming out this next week and from what I am hearing there will be nowhere for Pelosie, Schiff, Nadler, Or Schumaer to hide. The whole thing is now unraveling right in front of your eyes and they must be held accountable or it will happen again..

Sorry I had to peek and see what other stupid you were spewing. You 2nd point is not even worth a response. Point number 3 that the dossier was the SOLE item used to get FISA warrants is just plain wrong. I know why. Your phrasing “bought and paid for” that’s been regurgitated at nauseaby Hannity and the right wing institution. Youve been fed a bunch of horse crap. Here is actual testimony, not Empty talking points,that prove your claim wrong...

“We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information,” McCabe told CNN. “Was the dossier material important to the [FISA] package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not.”

“We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information,” McCabe told CNN.

McCabe? The guy who lied during an internal FBI investigation?

 

[Slade3200]

Probably just shouldn’t lie to the FBI then. It’s not that hard

Worked for Hillary Clinton. Sally Yates lies under oath. User Clip: Yates LIES under oath
You don't mind lies at all. You lie yourself all the time. You back liars. Why you hold a grudge against Michael Flynn is a mystery except your tiny brain is fixated on it.

Easy - Can it be said that Flynn was a piece within the Domino structure in which they wanted to set up in a precise order, otherwise in hopes that the rest would fall, thus eventually getting to Trump their ultimate prize if pushed Flynn hard enough in the line up ???

Yes that could be said. Just like how the street guys are used to get the mob boss. If Trump was dirty then that would definitely be a tactic that would be considered. Is that kind of a tactic illegal/unethical?

Both if the ultimate target was innocent, and the ploy was purely political.

The ultimate target as you insist on calling it was just handed the keys tot he most powerful job in the world while being illegally Supported by a foreign government and was constantly lying to the American people about having contacts with that foreign government. Had Trump been honest and upfront about the Russian contacts and things went down the same way then I’d totally agree with you... but it was the lying, both with Trump and Flynn that warrants suspicion and investigation.

while being illegally Supported by a foreign government

Weaponized memes, very powerful!

and was constantly lying to the American people about having contacts with that foreign government.

Which illegal contacts were there?

You can play games by saying weaponized memes but the fact remains that every intelligence official and vast majority of congressional leaders from both sides who have seen the evidence support the seriousness of the election interference claims. It’s pretty funny to see People like you who are supposed to stand for strong borders and national security and law and order try and dismiss this problem because it doesn’t play well politically for Trump. Pretty pathetic actually.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This is where your narrative falls apart. Flynn wasn’t under any of that pressure at the time
of the interview when he LIED. If the FBI used that lie to try and extract more information from him in a way that fell
outside the law then the FBI should be held to account. That’s a separate issue and it does not exonerate Flynn for the crime he committed. Keep trying to muddy the water by conflating the two issues though. You’re totally fooling us all!

The FBI has been held to account. That's why the prosecutor in the Flynn case threw in the towel and the case against Flynn has been dropped. It's been nice chatting.

the prosecutor in the Flynn case quit in rebellion of the action, then that cleared Barr's guys to withdraw the prosecution against Flynn, right after he quit.

much like the prosecutors over the Roger Stone case quit, the day Barr's guys came in and changed the recommended sentence under the guidelines to a ''cushy'' lower sentence for the president's ''friend''.


dirty is, as dirty does

crooked is, as crooked does....

I can't comprehend how even you guys don't see this.....?

"Van Grack has long informed Sullivan that the government’s so-called "Brady" obligations, referring to prosecutors' duty to turn over exculpatory materials to defendants, have been met. In an October 2019 filing, Van Grack denied governmental misconduct and assured the court that the government “has complied, and will continue to comply, with its discovery and disclosure obligations, including those imposed pursuant to Brady and the Court’s Standing Order.”

"What Van Grack didn’t inform the court about – and didn’t provide to Flynn – was the newly unsealed January 4, 2017 "Closing Communication" from the FBI Washington Field Office, which recommended the FBI close its investigation of Flynn, as its exhaustive search through government databases “did not yield any information on which to predicate further investigative efforts."

Flynn bombshells cast doubt on Mueller prosecutor Brandon Van Grack's compliance with court order

Newly unsealed bombshell evidence documenting the FBI's efforts to target national security adviser Michael Flynn -- including a top official's memo debating whether their "goal" was "to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired" -- calls into question whether Brandon Van Grack, a...

www.foxnews.com

So WTF? Grack suddenly denied exculpatory materials to Flynn? Why? Seriously, can anyone here answer that question?

Grack believed that he had no obligation to give these as Flynn accepted a plea agreement. This was in erorr as the court ordered "all relevant exculpatory evidence" handed over, which they to this day did not until it was redacted and released by Barr. Grack violated the courts order in no uncertain terms and Sullivan is very upset at this point. I fully expect Sullivan to throw out the whole case as criminal misconduct by the state. I hope he takes off a few heads when he does it and forwards them for prosecution themselves for framing Flynn.

Couldn't say if sufficient evidence exists that will stand up in court, but I would say that the applicable lawyers should at the least lose their license to practice law. Can they do that at the federal level? It might be a state by state issue, and the blue states won't do that; looks bad don't you know for the party.

But the whole mess stinks to high heaven. To me, this is worse than Watergate, which of course was an actual crime but a victimless one. No one was hurt and damaged in any way by Watergate except for the tarnished reputations on those involved. But this time, the reputations of some of our most trusted institutions have been severely damaged, and it will be quite some time before that trust is restored. Which BTW Mr Wray is not doing so well at.

You’re right about on thing... trust is broken. When we have a POTUS and a NSA lying to the public and lying to FBI agents in the course of an investigation we have a big problem.

When we have a POTUS and a NSA lying to the public and lying to FBI agents in the course of an investigation we have a big problem.

And the DNI and the CIA director.
But enough about the corrupt Obama administration.

 

[Leo123]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

 

[Leo123]

This is where your narrative falls apart. Flynn wasn’t under any of that pressure at the time
of the interview when he LIED. If the FBI used that lie to try and extract more information from him in a way that fell
outside the law then the FBI should be held to account. That’s a separate issue and it does not exonerate Flynn for the crime he committed. Keep trying to muddy the water by conflating the two issues though. You’re totally fooling us all!

The FBI has been held to account. That's why the prosecutor in the Flynn case threw in the towel and the case against Flynn has been dropped. It's been nice chatting.

the prosecutor in the Flynn case quit in rebellion of the action, then that cleared Barr's guys to withdraw the prosecution against Flynn, right after he quit.

much like the prosecutors over the Roger Stone case quit, the day Barr's guys came in and changed the recommended sentence under the guidelines to a ''cushy'' lower sentence for the president's ''friend''.


dirty is, as dirty does

crooked is, as crooked does....

I can't comprehend how even you guys don't see this.....?

"Van Grack has long informed Sullivan that the government’s so-called "Brady" obligations, referring to prosecutors' duty to turn over exculpatory materials to defendants, have been met. In an October 2019 filing, Van Grack denied governmental misconduct and assured the court that the government “has complied, and will continue to comply, with its discovery and disclosure obligations, including those imposed pursuant to Brady and the Court’s Standing Order.”

"What Van Grack didn’t inform the court about – and didn’t provide to Flynn – was the newly unsealed January 4, 2017 "Closing Communication" from the FBI Washington Field Office, which recommended the FBI close its investigation of Flynn, as its exhaustive search through government databases “did not yield any information on which to predicate further investigative efforts."

Flynn bombshells cast doubt on Mueller prosecutor Brandon Van Grack's compliance with court order

Newly unsealed bombshell evidence documenting the FBI's efforts to target national security adviser Michael Flynn -- including a top official's memo debating whether their "goal" was "to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired" -- calls into question whether Brandon Van Grack, a...

www.foxnews.com

So WTF? Grack suddenly denied exculpatory materials to Flynn? Why? Seriously, can anyone here answer that question?

Grack believed that he had no obligation to give these as Flynn accepted a plea agreement. This was in erorr as the court ordered "all relevant exculpatory evidence" handed over, which they to this day did not until it was redacted and released by Barr. Grack violated the courts order in no uncertain terms and Sullivan is very upset at this point. I fully expect Sullivan to throw out the whole case as criminal misconduct by the state. I hope he takes off a few heads when he does it and forwards them for prosecution themselves for framing Flynn.

Internal memos Are not exculpatory evidence. Prove me wrong

They are when they show a concerted effort To take out a Duly elected president or show prosecutorial misconduct.

More empty talking points... boring

Reading your own posts Slade?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You literally just said this “You consistently act as though defendants always have a free choice whether to lie or not.” So no you were speaking generally and specificly.

WHAT? That literally makes no sense!
If you have finally sickened even yourself with juggling your nonsense arguments (and I use that term arguments loosely with regard to what you do) just say so.

Don't punk out like a little bitch coward!

Ok I’m done wasting my time. It was fun owning you for a while but now it’s getting boring

You don't "own" anything. You couldn't even own a library card. Or a Subway punch card.
I don't know where you've been hiding away for such a long time but I suggest you crawl back there
and pull the rock back over you.

 

[Billy_Bob]

And how Flynn fired his shitty lawyers Covington Burling (who told Flynn just to plead guilty to everything and hope for mercy from the system....which was the worst advice ever) and brought on board someone who fought the DOJ for a living and that made all the difference.

And that firm has a major partner by the name of ERIC HOLDER, who was Obama's right hand man at removing Flynn. Thier advice was not in Flynn's interests.

Flynn was fired by Trump and arrested by Trumps FBI/DoJ and prosecuted over the past three years by directors appointed by Trump. What were you saying about Obama and Holder again?

Interesting that the information was provided by Oabama's FBI and his deep state plants. Now that info has been exposed as a lie and fraud. ITs so bad they had to MANUFACTURE the lies. Guess who is no longer employed in Trumps FBI and DOJ? These people are looking at very long prison sentences.. IF they find this was indeed a Coup D'e Tat they need to swing from gallows.

That statement was straight out of your asshole. How do I know? Because it smells like shit. I dont care if the “information came from Obama“... if new Trump people have been in charge for the past 3 YEARS then they are big boys and they can assess for themselves... not that there Is any legitimacy to your claim. I just like to show how idiotic your logic is even if what you were saying is true.

what’s different about NOW you may ask... well I appreciate the question. Well it’s campaign season with an election around the corner. Let’s just assume that Flynn covered for Trump by lying about talking sanctions with Russia and now it is Trumps time to either pardon or get his lackies to clear Flynn... I know I know totally crazy theory isnt it... or is it???

you've got being a little bitch down pat.. Now lets look at the facts recently exposed.

1. Obama ordered and orchestrated the Coup D'e Tat. From the very beginning he was the one who opened the investigation into Flynn and three others. The FBI, NSA, and DOJ were complicit.

2. We now know the FBI found no "negative information" on Flynn and was about to close the case when Strozk was ordered to manufacture a crime that would support their narrative.

3. The Dossier, bought and paid for by Clinton was nothing more than hersay and Russian propognada. Not even Steel would stand behind it veracity and he wrote it. Now we know that it was the SOLE item used in the FISA warrants and the fraud commited on the court as it was never verified or verifiable and the FBI knew it was a lie before the first FISA warrant was asked for.

4. The Mueller investigation also knew, the day that he was seated, that all the pretexts for his job had been shown falsified and that no collusion existed, ever! There was no reason for the Mueller office of Special Counsel and they were 100% aware of it.

The whole thing was a lie and an attempt to unseat a duly elected president, A Coup D'e Tat... Another 2,600 pages is coming out this next week and from what I am hearing there will be nowhere for Pelosie, Schiff, Nadler, Or Schumaer to hide. The whole thing is now unraveling right in front of your eyes and they must be held accountable or it will happen again..

Sorry I had to peek and see what other stupid you were spewing. You 2nd point is not even worth a response. Point number 3 that the dossier was the SOLE item used to get FISA warrants is just plain wrong. I know why. Your phrasing “bought and paid for” that’s been regurgitated at nauseaby Hannity and the right wing institution. Youve been fed a bunch of horse crap. Here is actual testimony, not Empty talking points,that prove your claim wrong...

“We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information,” McCabe told CNN. “Was the dossier material important to the [FISA] package? Of course, it was. As was every fact included in that package. Was it the majority of what was in the package? Absolutely not.”

“We started the investigations without the dossier. We were proceeding with the investigations before we ever received that information,” McCabe told CNN.

McCabe? The guy who lied during an internal FBI investigation?

McCabe? the one who said this on CNN?



There are many comments on CNN and MSDNC that are going to come back and bite these liars that are on tape. They wont be able to hide from them.

 

[Faun]

Top FBI officials discussed the possibility of prosecuting retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn for lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians as agents planned how to conduct their interview of the Trump national security adviser, newly unsealed notes.

I wonder if Flynn will even be pardon at all by Trump?

NO need... Flynn has been exonerated...

"Exonerated??"

He's still a convicted felon.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Withholding exculpatory evidence is not fine. What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

Why not?

Because it was an internal memo. I thought you were a prosecutor. You don’t know this?

Because it was an internal memo.

An internal memo, a week after the phone call, saying …...

"The absence of any derogatory information or lead information from these logical sources reduce the number of investigative avenues and techniques to pursue. Per the direction of FBI management, Crossfire Razor was not interviewed as part of the case closing procedure. The FBI is closing this investigation," the agent wrote on Jan. 4, 2017.

That's exculpatory. You don't know this?

Those communications are internal deliberations, not public record to be shared in court. Are you high?

B. What to Review


To ensure that all discovery is disclosed on a timely basis, generally all potentially discoverable material within the custody or control of the prosecution team should be reviewed2. The review process should cover the following areas:


1. The Investigative Agency’s Files: With respect to Department of Justice law enforcement agencies, with limited exceptions3, the prosecutor should be granted access to the substantive case file and any other file or document the prosecutor has reason to believe may contain discoverable information related to the matter being prosecuted.4 Therefore, the prosecutor can personally review the file or documents or may choose to request production of potentially discoverable materials from the case agents. With respect to outside agencies, the prosecutor should request access to files and/or production of all potentially discoverable material. The investigative agency’s entire investigative file, including documents such as FBI Electronic Communications (ECs), inserts, emails, etc. should be reviewed for discoverable information. If such information is contained in a document that the agency deems to be an “internal” document such as an email, an insert, an administrative document, or an EC, it may not be necessary to produce the internal document, but it will be necessary to produce all of the discoverable information contained in it. Prosecutors should also discuss with the investigative agency whether files from other investigations or non-investigative files such as confidential source files might contain discoverable information. Those additional files or relevant portions thereof should also be reviewed as necessary.

…..

Prosecutors should never describe the discovery being provided as “open file.” Even if the prosecutor intends to provide expansive discovery, it is always possible that something will be inadvertently omitted from production and the prosecutor will then have unintentionally misrepresented the scope of materials provided. Furthermore, because the concept of the “file” is imprecise, such a representation exposes the prosecutor to broader disclosure requirements than intended or to sanction for failure to disclose documents, e.g. agent notes or internal memos, that the court may deem to have been part of the “file.”

…..

C. Form of Disclosure: There may be instances when it is not advisable to turn over discoverable information in its original form, such as when the disclosure would create security concerns or when such information is contained in attorney notes, internal agency documents, confidential source documents, Suspicious Activity Reports, etc. If discoverable information is not provided in its original form and is instead provided in a letter to defense counsel, including particular language, where pertinent, prosecutors should take great care to ensure that the full scope of pertinent information is provided to the defendant.

.....

5. Substantive Case-Related Communications: “Substantive” case-related communications may contain discoverable information. Those communications that contain discoverable information should be maintained in the case file or otherwise preserved in a manner that associates them with the case or investigation. “Substantive” case-related communications are most likely to occur (1) among prosecutors and/or agents, (2) between prosecutors and/or agents and witnesses and/or victims, and (3) between victim-witness coordinators and witnesses and/or victims. Such communications may be memorialized in emails, memoranda, or notes. “Substantive” communications include factual reports about investigative activity, factual discussions of the relative merits of evidence, factual information obtained during interviews or interactions with witnesses/victims, and factual issues relating to credibility. Communications involving case impressions or investigative or prosecutive strategies without more would not ordinarily be considered discoverable, but substantive case-related communications should be reviewed carefully to determine whether all or part of a communication (or the information contained therein) should be disclosed.

MEMORANDUM FOR DEPARTMENT PROSECUTORS

www.justice.gov

Those communications are internal deliberations, not public record to be shared in court.

I didn't see backup for your claim at the above link. But plenty that disagrees.
Maybe you'll have better luck?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Probably just shouldn’t lie to the FBI then. It’s not that hard

Worked for Hillary Clinton. Sally Yates lies under oath. User Clip: Yates LIES under oath
You don't mind lies at all. You lie yourself all the time. You back liars. Why you hold a grudge against Michael Flynn is a mystery except your tiny brain is fixated on it.

Easy - Can it be said that Flynn was a piece within the Domino structure in which they wanted to set up in a precise order, otherwise in hopes that the rest would fall, thus eventually getting to Trump their ultimate prize if pushed Flynn hard enough in the line up ???

Yes that could be said. Just like how the street guys are used to get the mob boss. If Trump was dirty then that would definitely be a tactic that would be considered. Is that kind of a tactic illegal/unethical?

Both if the ultimate target was innocent, and the ploy was purely political.

The ultimate target as you insist on calling it was just handed the keys tot he most powerful job in the world while being illegally Supported by a foreign government and was constantly lying to the American people about having contacts with that foreign government. Had Trump been honest and upfront about the Russian contacts and things went down the same way then I’d totally agree with you... but it was the lying, both with Trump and Flynn that warrants suspicion and investigation.

while being illegally Supported by a foreign government

Weaponized memes, very powerful!

and was constantly lying to the American people about having contacts with that foreign government.

Which illegal contacts were there?

You can play games by saying weaponized memes but the fact remains that every intelligence official and vast majority of congressional leaders from both sides who have seen the evidence support the seriousness of the election interference claims. It’s pretty funny to see People like you who are supposed to stand for strong borders and national security and law and order try and dismiss this problem because it doesn’t play well politically for Trump. Pretty pathetic actually.

Yes, a couple of thousand dollars in Facebook ads.
I'm surprised Hillary's $1 billion dollar plus in campaign spending was still able to get her to 227.

 

[Slade3200]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

 

[Slade3200]

You literally just said this “You consistently act as though defendants always have a free choice whether to lie or not.” So no you were speaking generally and specificly.

WHAT? That literally makes no sense!
If you have finally sickened even yourself with juggling your nonsense arguments (and I use that term arguments loosely with regard to what you do) just say so.

Don't punk out like a little bitch coward!

Ok I’m done wasting my time. It was fun owning you for a while but now it’s getting boring

You don't "own" anything. You couldn't even own a library card. Or a Subway punch card.
I don't know where you've been hiding away for such a long time but I suggest you crawl back there
and pull the rock back over you.

All you do is hurl insults and contradict yourself. It’s getting real Boring

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

All you do is hurl insults and contradict yourself. It’s getting real Boring

What? Not leaving like you said you were going to do, speaking of self contradiction?

You're a low IQ loser! Beat it, loser!

 

[Slade3200]

Withholding exculpatory evidence is not fine. What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

What you’re pointing to is not exculpatory evidence

Why not?

Because it was an internal memo. I thought you were a prosecutor. You don’t know this?

Because it was an internal memo.

An internal memo, a week after the phone call, saying …...

"The absence of any derogatory information or lead information from these logical sources reduce the number of investigative avenues and techniques to pursue. Per the direction of FBI management, Crossfire Razor was not interviewed as part of the case closing procedure. The FBI is closing this investigation," the agent wrote on Jan. 4, 2017.

That's exculpatory. You don't know this?

Those communications are internal deliberations, not public record to be shared in court. Are you high?

B. What to Review


To ensure that all discovery is disclosed on a timely basis, generally all potentially discoverable material within the custody or control of the prosecution team should be reviewed2. The review process should cover the following areas:


1. The Investigative Agency’s Files: With respect to Department of Justice law enforcement agencies, with limited exceptions3, the prosecutor should be granted access to the substantive case file and any other file or document the prosecutor has reason to believe may contain discoverable information related to the matter being prosecuted.4 Therefore, the prosecutor can personally review the file or documents or may choose to request production of potentially discoverable materials from the case agents. With respect to outside agencies, the prosecutor should request access to files and/or production of all potentially discoverable material. The investigative agency’s entire investigative file, including documents such as FBI Electronic Communications (ECs), inserts, emails, etc. should be reviewed for discoverable information. If such information is contained in a document that the agency deems to be an “internal” document such as an email, an insert, an administrative document, or an EC, it may not be necessary to produce the internal document, but it will be necessary to produce all of the discoverable information contained in it. Prosecutors should also discuss with the investigative agency whether files from other investigations or non-investigative files such as confidential source files might contain discoverable information. Those additional files or relevant portions thereof should also be reviewed as necessary.

…..

Prosecutors should never describe the discovery being provided as “open file.” Even if the prosecutor intends to provide expansive discovery, it is always possible that something will be inadvertently omitted from production and the prosecutor will then have unintentionally misrepresented the scope of materials provided. Furthermore, because the concept of the “file” is imprecise, such a representation exposes the prosecutor to broader disclosure requirements than intended or to sanction for failure to disclose documents, e.g. agent notes or internal memos, that the court may deem to have been part of the “file.”

…..

C. Form of Disclosure: There may be instances when it is not advisable to turn over discoverable information in its original form, such as when the disclosure would create security concerns or when such information is contained in attorney notes, internal agency documents, confidential source documents, Suspicious Activity Reports, etc. If discoverable information is not provided in its original form and is instead provided in a letter to defense counsel, including particular language, where pertinent, prosecutors should take great care to ensure that the full scope of pertinent information is provided to the defendant.

.....

5. Substantive Case-Related Communications: “Substantive” case-related communications may contain discoverable information. Those communications that contain discoverable information should be maintained in the case file or otherwise preserved in a manner that associates them with the case or investigation. “Substantive” case-related communications are most likely to occur (1) among prosecutors and/or agents, (2) between prosecutors and/or agents and witnesses and/or victims, and (3) between victim-witness coordinators and witnesses and/or victims. Such communications may be memorialized in emails, memoranda, or notes. “Substantive” communications include factual reports about investigative activity, factual discussions of the relative merits of evidence, factual information obtained during interviews or interactions with witnesses/victims, and factual issues relating to credibility. Communications involving case impressions or investigative or prosecutive strategies without more would not ordinarily be considered discoverable, but substantive case-related communications should be reviewed carefully to determine whether all or part of a communication (or the information contained therein) should be disclosed.

MEMORANDUM FOR DEPARTMENT PROSECUTORS

www.justice.gov

Those communications are internal deliberations, not public record to be shared in court.

I didn't see backup for your claim at the above link. But plenty that disagrees.
Maybe you'll have better luck?

Thank you! You made my point for me and cited the law. Substantive material includes factual discussion of evidence. Not opinions on how to adjudicate like you are trying to claim is relevant