Here's a Who's Who of the Killers, Mass Murderers, and Child Rapists Biden...
VIP Membership Christmas SALE: 60% Off!
Byron York OWNS Journo Claiming Kash Patel Will Target Trump Enemies With List...
Biden's Selective 'Conscience' About Sanctity of Life Adds Another Element to His Despicab...
'Tax Cut for the Rich My A*S': Brit Hume OWNS Lefties Claiming Trump...
Despicable Media: NY Daily News Headline on NYC Subway Arson Attack Earns Community...
WTAF?! Biden Commutes Fed Death Sentences of Nearly All Child Killers and Mass...
Not My Problem: DHS Chief Mayorkas Disgracefully Dodges Question About Trafficked Children
'Orangeland' Has a Nice Ring to It: Trump Repeats Desire to Acquire Greenland...
Monday Morning Meme Madness
What Did She Know? Kamala Harris Must Be Held Accountable for Hiding Joe...
Check Your Privilege? Georgia Homeowner ARRESTED for Calling Police on Squatters on HER...
Yes, Next Question: Jacobin Mag Asks If CEOs Create More Value Than Workers,...
Yet ANOTHER HOAX: Racist Pro-Trump Messages Found on Tennessee College Campus Were Fabrica...
LET'S GO! Rand Paul Says He Supports Vast Majority of Trump Cabinet Nominees,...

Peter Strzok (yes, that one) laments 'the corrupt transformation of our criminal justice system' after Kevin Clinesmith pleads guilty

These are dark times for the cause of justice. At least according to Peter Strzok:

Advertisement

What, exactly, is Strzok’s beef?

That’s it in a nutshell. From the Lawfare piece Strzok is pimping:

Ironically, the Clinesmith charges were filed at the same time that the Justice Department awaits a ruling on its motion to dismiss the case against Flynn—for lack of materiality. The department tied itself into knots to argue that Flynn’s lies were immaterial. Yet, strangely, it gives no such benefit to Clinesmith.

We wonder why these Flynn defenders—led by the president and the attorney general—have not lifted their voices on behalf of Clinesmith. Proof of materiality seems weaker in Clinesmith’s case than in Flynn’s. The CIA email that Clinesmith altered stated accurately that Page was “not a source” but that he was an “operational contact,” that is, someone with a relationship with the CIA. Clinesmith’s alteration arguably clarified the adviser’s relationship with the CIA rather than obscuring it, though this does not excuse his misrepresentation.

In the real world, these details about Clinesmith’s email do not defeat the materiality requirement—especially given that, as we have noted, materiality is typically easy to prove. But the arguments made in defense of Flynn would also seem to apply to Clinesmith. If we applied the ridiculous standard used by the Justice Department in the Flynn case to Clinesmith, then his alteration was similarly not material.

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement