Racial Reckoning? WAT? WaPo Out-Stupids Themselves Using Statue to Paint America's Birthda...
Nancy Pelosi Explains Why Dems Need to Take Back the House (ZERO Pushback...
Chuck Norris Walks Through The Valley of The Shadow of Death, Is Not...
The Role of Prayer in American Wars From the Revolution to Today
Greg Gutfeld Shuts DOWN Grifters Claiming Israel FORCED Trump Into Iran War annnd...
Here's the TSA Line at Houston's Bush Airport (Thank Sen. Schumer and the...
'Lisa, Lisa, LISA': Sarah Palin Takes Lisa Murkowski APART for Claiming It's Hard...
Mike Lee Explains Why Dems Saying They're OK With Voter ID but Not...
Sarah Huckabee Sanders 'Kills With Kindness' After Woke AR Restaurant Kicks Her OUT...
Left-On-Left Crime: Mehdi Hasan Dubs Bill Clinton 'Liar' + 'Epstein Class' Because He...
Tim Walz Complains WH 'Cutting Off' MN Health Care Funds—Funny, That's $250M Less...
Cruel Hoax Targets Erika Kirk: Shopping Spree Lie Exposed as Sick Attack on...
Tattoo Breakthrough: Elizabeth Warren Gives Graham Platner’s Nazi Ink a Pass, Endorses Him...
Vox Profiles the ‘Ragebait Candidate’ to Whom Young GOP Voters Are Paying Attention
Dem Mazie Hirono Claims Illegal Aliens Won’t Break Our Election Laws Because They...

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