Live Breaking News & Updates on Michael Flynn Case
Stay updated with breaking news from Michael flynn case. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
He was there on behalf of no clients or on behalf of a cyber expert, it really does not matter. when you have information about a crime the fbi takes it in a necessitate bases on its value, sometimes it seems like it is not worthy of further investigation, people call the fbi all day every day to say little green martians are interfering with my thoughts. they don t investigate those. but other cases they can take seriously they do investigate and they do vet the fact that you re representing a client are not representing a client, i don t think his material to this. i think it s especially rich in light of the fact that these investigators at the doj that are looking into the russia, in the michael flynn case dismissed that case because they found his statements were not material remember he lied to the fbi about what he said to the russian ambassador ....
They ary that clinton campaign used their law firm to submit dubious information to the fbi about russia and trump to gin up investigative activity to hurt his 2016 campaign. there has been no sign that he has found any evidence that have theory. so what that apparently leaves durham with is a lawyer who gave some the fbi some information he says he thought they should have. the fib chased that down and decided, eh, it s probably nothing. and maybe that lawyer, there is some question as to whether he fully revealed who he was representing at that time? does it matter who he was representing at the time? as for why this case is being brought now, well, look at clock. the meeting in question here happened on september 19, 2016. what s today s date? september 15, 2021. because of a five-year statute of limitations for such cases, mr. durham has a deadline of ....
As for why this case is being brought now, well, look at the clock. the meeting in question here happened on september 19th, 2016. what s today s date? september 15th, 2021. because of a five-year statute of limitations for such cases, mr. durham has a deadline of this weekend to bring a charge over activity from that date. literally the statute of limitations, i think, expires on sunday. here it is wednesday, and he s rushing to get this done before the statute of limitations expires. this indictment has apparently not been filed yet. we do not have all the facts yet. whether this lawyer told the fbi something untrue, whether it matters who his client was when he gave this information for the fbi for them to look into, that may be hashed out in court. but the big picture here, the substance of the suspicion around the alfa bank stuff is that this might be evidence of some means of covert ....
Being indicted for having brought this stuff to the fbi? well, i guess i would withhold judgment until i see what the case says and what the facts are that it s based on. we have some reporting. i guess i don t know if we know the whole story. based on the reporting i hear, i don t hear any evidence of the essential element of materiality. that is, you know, not every false statement is a crime. only the important ones. you know, if you lie about some irrelevant detail, that doesn t matter. so i don t know that there is evidence that he is lying at all. but even if he is about whether he was there on behalf of no client or he was there on behalf of a cyber expert, it really doesn t matter. when you have information about a crime, the fbi takes it in and assesses it based on its value. some things, you know, seem like it is not worthy of further investigation. people call the fbi all day, every day to say, you know, little green martians are interfering with my thoughts. ....
Center. thanks for being here tonight. thank you. and thank you so much, rachel, for beginning with those stories from the motion, because it shows what is happening on the ground the last two weeks that the law has been in effect what do you think of the strength of the justice department s case against the texas ban, and what do you make of this new request for a restraining order, an injunction against enforcing the ban? it seems like the judge is, obviously, going to consider it, but on nobody s idea of a quick timeline? well, it s a very strong case that the department of justice has. they have directly sued texas for violating the constitutional rights of texans. this is a clear violation of the constitution. you cannot ban abortion at six weeks. we have as the department of justice papers made clear 48 years of unbroken precedent about the right of people to make these decisions for themselves. ....