WaPo Community Note Nuked for Post on Athletes Who Have Been 'Excluded From...
Western Lensman Has a Biden Flashback the 'No Kings' Lefties Applauded (Translation: They'...
Proof-Positive That the 'No Kings' and 'Stop the Oligarchy' Screeching From the Left...
AWKWARD: Dem Sen. Elissa Slotkin Pivot Quickly When Bill Maher Calls Out Dems'...
Putting the ‘Art’ in Arthritis: Seniors Gather to Make Protest Signs for Saturday’s...
Jettisoned ‘Journos’: Jim Acosta Reacts to FCC Chair Brendan Carr Celebrating Cast-Off Med...
'Fight the Oligarchy' Bernie Sanders Caught in First Class While Government Workers Left...
'No Kings' Cheerleader Hakeem Jeffries Says OF COURSE Trump Always Had the Authority...
Nerdeen Kiswani Targeted in Foiled Firebomb Plot — The Same Tactics She Defended...
Trauma Drama: Tim Walz Whines About Anguish Minnesotans Are Feeling Due to Enforced...
New Secret Service Low: Agent on Jill Biden Detail Negligently Discharges Weapon …...
Party Priorities: Dem Pramila Jayapal Says ICE Must Be Prosecuted and Illegal Aliens...
Same People Who Defended Harassing Christian Bakers Now Cheer When Sarah Huckabee Sanders...
From Match Day Chaos to Monopoly Power: House Judiciary Exposes How the Residency...
The Hidden Cost of the Senate Deal: Unpaid ICE Support Staff Holding Up...

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