Socialism's Math Lesson: NYC Mayor Mamdani Promises Free Everything, Then Begs New York...
Joyce Carol Oates: Do You Know Who Else Had a Bunker? Hitler
Dr. Wishing Trump Dead Holds Life in Her Hands: Beth Israel Faces Backlash...
Adam Kinzinger: Zelensky Hasn’t Whined About Needing a Ballroom to Keep Him Safe
Texas Tribune: Egyptian Family Long Held in ICE Detention Redetained After Judge-Ordered R...
White House Trolls the Left Perfectly — ‘No Kings’ Crowd Has Entered the...
Hetero Hatred: Aaron Rupar Seems VERY Upset that Donald Trump Finds His Wife...
Oof! JoJoFromJerz's Face Filter Melts as Jack Posobiec Reveals Attempted Trump Shooter Was...
The Internet Is A-BUZZ Over President Trump Holding a Bee
Seashell Formation Enthusiast James Comey Indicted for a Second Time
Richard Stengel: Holding the WHCD at White House Ballroom Could Violate First Amendment
'Jokes' For Me, Not For Thee: Jake Tapper's Defense of Jimmy Kimmel Gets...
Obama Bro Dan Pfeiffer Says Marco Rubio Is Personally Responsible for AIDS Across...
Angel Dad Joe Abraham to Ro Khanna: My Daughter Was Killed by an...
'Come AGAIN?!' Kash Patel Just LEVELS Tim Walz for Trying to Take CREDIT...

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