Rep. Jerry Nadler Explains Why States Are Refusing to Hand Over SNAP Data:...
Pramila Jayapal: ‘Being Undocumented Isn’t a Crime’ – Federal Law and Half of...
Jim Acosta Says Trump Should Be Impeached Over Hateful Comments About the Somali...
Another ‘Police Brutality’ Story Collapses: Woman Refuses ID to Protect Illegal Boyfriend
JD Vance Is Hearing Rumors That the EU Commission Will Fine X Hundreds...
George Clooney's Casual Muslim Brotherhood Flex: Bragging About Wife's Terror Ties on Barr...
Mayor Brandon Johnson Refuses to Entertain Racist Question About Teen Violence in Chicago
Rep. Ilhan Omar Claims She Knew Nothing About $250 Million Welfare Fraud Scheme
Dumbo Gumbo: Leftist Pro-Illegal Alien Protesters Disrupt Council Meeting Over New Orleans...
Mollie Hemingway Nails It — FBI Sat on Jan 5 Pipe Bomb Intel...
Local News Reports on the Rich History of Somali Integration in Minnesota
Walz Complains People Are Driving By and Yelling the ‘R’ Word—X Replies With...
ME! ME! ME!: Senator Mark Kelly Wants Us to Know His Recent Media...
Don’t Name It, Don’t Solve It: Why the Left Is Furious Trump Called...
Gavin Newsom Says 'Judgmental' Democrats Need to Be ‘Culturally Normal’ to Appeal to...

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