Trump's (and X's!) Reaction to Iran's New, 'Probably Gay,' Supreme Leader Is Hilarious...
Salena Zito Shreds a Fresh Round of Conspiracy Theories About the Day Trump...
TX Democrat Wack-Job's Anti-SAVE Act Sob Story About Her 'Married Friend' Gets Even...
Jake Tapper Says Journos Hold Leaders to Account and Want US to Succeed...
LMAO! Ted Lieu's 'Dear FCC' Post Threatening TO SUE Because 1st Amendment This...
Why Question an American Hero? DeRosa Stands by SEAL Team Six Speaker for...
David French Doubles Down: James Talarico Is the Real Christian, You Haters Are...
Kentucky Showdown Brewing: Beshear Blasts Vance's 'Lazy' Label, Gets Hit with Privilege Ba...
Monday Morning Meme Madness
Beyoncé and Jim-C: James Comey Says He Once Sang the Diva’s ‘Sandcastles’ During...
Dan Crenshaw Turns a Blind Eye to the Real Reasons for His Primary...
Jimmy Kimmel's Oscars' Swipe at 'Countries Whose Leaders Don't Support Free Speech' Was,...
Youth Travel Sports Have Become a Family-Destroying Trap – Thank God Someone Finally...
BREAKING: Bluesky's New Pitch: Come Over to Bluesky, You Will Be Glad to...
Maine Kampf: Platner Walks Back Apology for 'Nazi Skull' Tattoo, Calls It Eminently...

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