Scott Jennings Reminds Karen Finney She Worked for Bill Clinton During Her ‘Character...
UK Politician Claims Elon Musk Orchestrated the Riot in Belfast After Beheading Attempt
Boston Police Searching for Suspects in Armed Robbery of Lemonade Stand
Former Court Clerks Arrested for Allegedly Helping Illegals Evade ICE
Thank You, European Soccer Fans, for Reminding Us How Great America Actually Is
Professor Blames Austin Metcalf’s Father for Not Teaching His Son ‘Black Boys Have...
ABC News Show Riot Damage After Asylum Seeker ‘Allegedly Attacked Another Person With...
NBC News: Burning Cross in Chicago Park Shocks Residents; January 6 Connection?
Ryan Grim: Republicans Looked Silly When ‘Nazi Tattoo’ Turned Out Not to Be...
What Stuck Out to Karmelo Anthony’s Father Was the ‘All-White Jury’
World Cup Tourists Find Surreal Sporting Goods Store With a Firing Range; Also...
Gavin Newsom's 'Donald Trump's Dream' Video Melts All Remaining Projection Detectors
BOMBSHELL: MI Senate Dem’s Campaign Staffer Busted in Hamas-Linked Threat Plot Against UM...
Pentagon on Lockdown, Trump Striking Iran, Seizing Kharg Island?
Kimmel and TMZ Tried Again to Mock Spencer Pratt and Ended Up Accidentally...

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