Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[Spurtacular]

bombing social websites

:lol That's a game changer, amirite?

[Spurtacular]

hacking into financial systems

And doing what?

[TSA]

Trump's DOJ indicted the 12 Russians running that account. Are you saying the administration is lying?
Lying? No. Incompetent. Yes.

Mueller indicted the 12 Russians based on evidence that the FBI had that was given to them by Crowdstrike. The FBI never examined the servers on their own.

Crowdstrike later admitted under oath they had no actual proof Russia did it.

"We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated,"

"There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."

"There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."

"There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."

"Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."

Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that."

[TSA]

No one - I mean NO ONE seems to be bothered that Flynn- NEVER ONCE - brought up RUSSIA’S cyber-attack on our election! WHY??? Only one of two reasons- (1) because Flynn does not care about the USA getting attacked? Or (2) - because both Flynn AND Russia- both KNEW that the cyber-attack was and had already been planned and executed by both Russia and the trump team traitors. Neither of those two reasons are acceptable to REAL AMERICANS!!!
Maybe because the Intelligence Community Assessment wasn’t released until January 2017 and Flynn’s call took place in December 2016.

[DMC]

Maybe because the Intelligence Community Assessment wasn’t released until January 2017 and Flynn’s call took place in December 2016.

pfff time travel isn't completely impossible.

[Spurs Homer]

Maybe because the Intelligence Community Assessment wasn’t released until January 2017 and Flynn’s call took place in December 2016.

Flynn knew that Obama had placed sanctions and had expelled the russians -

Flynn knew that Kislyak was pissed at Obama - and never said - "why did you guys cyberattack our elections?"

Because Flynn, Pence, Trump all knew why Russia had attacked the USA - and they actively took part in that attack against the US.

Flynn knew and basically gave Russia his (and Trumps) blessing that trump team was OK with the attack on our election.

[spurraider21]

Maybe because the Intelligence Community Assessment wasn’t released until January 2017 and Flynn’s call took place in December 2016.
Why were the December 2016 sanctions rolled out?

[TSA]

Why were the December 2016 sanctions rolled out?

Because Russia bought Facebook ads, had trolls posting memes, and Crowdstrike claimed without evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. You’re aware Flynn learned of the sanctions and expulsions while on vacation in the DR on the same day he took a call with Kislyak aren’t you?

[Spurs Homer]

Because Russia bought Facebook ads, had trolls posting memes, and Crowdstrike claimed without evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. You’re aware Flynn learned of the sanctions and expulsions while on vacation in the DR on the same day he took a call with Kislyak aren’t you?


:lmao:lmao:lmao


meeting with russians on tropical islands - are vacations now?

setting up secret channels to betray your country good now?

mueller bad now?


:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Spurs Homer]

At least now we know some of why Judge Sullivan read some un-redacted documents in court and basically called Flynn a piece of shit traitor.

The more facts that are unearthed - EVEN IF - the Republican turncoats think it will expose some kind of "deep state"


All it does is expose the treason that trump and barr and putin are desperately trying to hide.

You DON'T want everything exposed -

only things that muddy the issue and point to bullshit conspiracies -

If you trump fellators wanted the truth to ALL come out - you would NOT like what you would find.

But I am sure you would still take Russia's side.

[spurraider21]

Because Russia bought Facebook ads, had trolls posting memes, and Crowdstrike claimed without evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. You’re aware Flynn learned of the sanctions and expulsions while on vacation in the DR on the same day he took a call with Kislyak aren’t you?
Well aware. And kislyak brought then up during their call

[ElNono]

Lying? No. Incompetent. Yes.

Mueller indicted the 12 Russians based on evidence that the FBI had that was given to them by Crowdstrike. The FBI never examined the servers on their own.

Except that that's not solely what Mueller used to indict them.

Here's the indictment:
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2018/07/Muellerindictment.pdf

There's clearly way, way more than Crowdstrike examining servers here. Not only that, it involved not just the DNC but also the DCCC hacks.

There's track and tracing of email addresses, facebook, twitter, google, third party servers, etc. lol @ the notion that indictments would be introduced solely on hearsay. That's just frankly naive and ignorant.

But look, since you have it all figured out, and you think Barr got it wrong, and those indictments are still up and valid, you should definitely write up the DOJ, the NSA and let them know what you found out! :lol

smh

[TSA]

Except that that's not solely what Mueller used to indict them.

Here's the indictment:
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2018/07/Muellerindictment.pdf

There's clearly way, way more than Crowdstrike examining servers here. Not only that, it involved not just the DNC but also the DCCC hacks.

There's track and tracing of email addresses, facebook, twitter, google, third party servers, etc. lol @ the notion that indictments would be introduced solely on hearsay. That's just frankly naive and ignorant.

But look, since you have it all figured out, and you think Barr got it wrong, and those indictments are still up and valid, you should definitely write up the DOJ, the NSA and let them know what you found out! :lol

smh

And Mueller knew none of what was charged would ever see the light of a court room. Doesn’t hold much weight. Show charge.

[TSA]

Except that that's not solely what Mueller used to indict them.

Here's the indictment:
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2018/07/Muellerindictment.pdf

There's clearly way, way more than Crowdstrike examining servers here. Not only that, it involved not just the DNC but also the DCCC hacks.

There's track and tracing of email addresses, facebook, twitter, google, third party servers, etc. lol @ the notion that indictments would be introduced solely on hearsay. That's just frankly naive and ignorant.

But look, since you have it all figured out, and you think Barr got it wrong, and those indictments are still up and valid, you should definitely write up the DOJ, the NSA and let them know what you found out! :lol

smh

You lol @ the notion indictments would be brought on hearsay when you’ve just seen that FISA warrants were issued on hearsay.

[TSA]

Well aware. And kislyak brought then up during their call

And Flynn brushed off his question of the US still fighting the same enemy with multiple yeah yeahs. There was no in depth conversation about sanctions, it was completely one sided and a single reference by Kislyak. You’re being disingenuous saying they discussed sanctions. It never happened.

[spurraider21]

And Flynn brushed off his question of the US still fighting the same enemy with multiple yeah yeahs. There was no in depth conversation about sanctions, it was completely one sided and a single reference by Kislyak. You’re being disingenuous saying they discussed sanctions. It never happened.
he said yeah yeah and then randomly once again, unprompted brought up keeping the response reciprocal. totally unrelated!

this isnt the basis of the guilty plea withdrawal attempt OR the doj's motion to dismiss, for a reason :lol

[ChumpDumper]

And Flynn brushed off his question of the US still fighting the same enemy with multiple yeah yeahs. There was no in depth conversation about sanctions, it was completely one sided and a single reference by Kislyak. You’re being disingenuous saying they discussed sanctions. It never happened.Flynn said he did in his plea agreement. It's literally the first sentence in the list he made. If you're calling him a liar I agree, generally speaking.

[ElNono]

And Mueller knew none of what was charged would ever see the light of a court room. Doesn’t hold much weight. Show charge.


You lol @ the notion indictments would be brought on hearsay when you’ve just seen that FISA warrants were issued on hearsay.

These indictments are actually public record, and clearly demonstrate the investigation is beyond whatever Crowdstrike did. Crowdstrike clearly didn't know that subject A logged into yahoo mail this or that day, or searched this or that keyword.

You get that from subpoenas on Yahoo, Google, etc... so we can certainly throw away the notion that these indictments are based on Crowdstrike alone.

BTW, what indictments were brought on hearsay? Most of the people indicted were actually found guilty. Cohen, Papadopoulos, Stone, and even Flynn plead guilty until Barr bailed him out.

[Th'Pusher]

Because Russia bought Facebook ads, had trolls posting memes, and Crowdstrike claimed without evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. You’re aware Flynn learned of the sanctions and expulsions while on vacation in the DR on the same day he took a call with Kislyak aren’t you?

Why do you feel the need to deceive? You literally just posted upstream crowd strike had circumstantial evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. You can’t be so fucking stupid that you don’t know that circumstantial evidence is evidence. Do you understand these lies undermine your credibility or is it just shield trump at all cost, facts be damned?

That question is rhetorical, btw.

[FrostKing]

Russia has been thriving. Operation Yuri executed.

[Winehole23]

Why do you feel the need to deceive? You literally just posted upstream crowd strike had circumstantial evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. You can’t be so fucking stupid that you don’t know that circumstantial evidence is evidence. Do you understand these lies undermine your credibility or is it just shield trump at all cost, facts be damned?

That question is rhetorical, btw.TSA twists himself into a pretzel on the reg shielding for Trump. He hardly posts for any other reason.

[Spurs Homer]

TSA twists himself into a pretzel on the reg shielding for Trump. He hardly posts for any other reason.

comrade TSA is russia and trumps sick wet dream

[Spurs Homer]

Is Obama, McCabe, Comey, Biden


in jumpsuits yet?


:lmao:lmao

[TSA]

he said yeah yeah and then randomly once again, unprompted brought up keeping the response reciprocal. totally unrelated!

this isnt the basis of the guilty plea withdrawal attempt OR the doj's motion to dismiss, for a reason :lol

He didn’t randomly and unprompted bring it up...he was literally just talking about it. Did you not read the transcript? :lol

[TSA]

Why do you feel the need to deceive? You literally just posted upstream crowd strike had circumstantial evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. You can’t be so fucking stupid that you don’t know that circumstantial evidence is evidence. Do you understand these lies undermine your credibility or is it just shield trump at all cost, facts be damned?

That question is rhetorical, btw.

There’s a huge gap between Russia hacked the DNC and we think Russia hacked the DNC but have no proof.

[TSA]

Exposing the hoax

By Andrew C. McCarthy
May 28, 2020 - 11:00 PM

No need to build to a crescendo — let’s just say it: The Trump-Russia investigation was a politically driven fraud from beginning to end. It was opened on false pretenses, sustained by investigative abuses, and will undoubtedly end in recriminatory angst, which is what happens when the kind of accountability the victims demand does not, indeed cannot, come to pass.

Worst of all is the damage wrought, though even that isn’t fully understood. Obama administration officials exploited the awesome national security powers that we trust our government to use for counterintelligence operations that safeguard America from jihadists and other foreign hostiles. Because of the abuse, and the growing awareness that few of the abusers will be held to meaningful account, those powers have lost the solid constituency they had maintained in Congress for nearly two decades. Thus, this episode will prove to be a catastrophe for American national security.

Last August, I released Ball of Collusion. As a former longtime federal law enforcement official who is proud of that service, I had come reluctantly to the realization that the Trump-Russia escapade was less an investigation than a political narrative — hence the book’s subtitle, The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. In fact, it would be more accurate to say I had been dragged to it, kicking and screaming. In the early days, friends of mine, both pro-Trump and Trump-skeptic, asked me if it was possible that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice had brought an uncorroborated screed of innuendo (under the guise of campaign opposition research) to the secret federal tribunal that issues foreign-intelligence surveillance warrants, in order to monitor the Trump campaign. Confidently, I assured them that that was inconceivable.

Turns out, by trusting that such a thing could never happen, I was the guy wearing the tinfoil hat.

Still, until recently, it was perilous to draw anything but tentative conclusions. There was no doubting that irregularities riddled the Trump-Russia inquiry through the tumultuous months of the 2016 election campaign. Yet, law enforcement and intelligence agencies stonewall because it works. Despite the fact that the executive branch had been under President Trump’s control, at least nominally, since 2017, the Justice Department, the FBI, and the rest of the 17-agency sprawl known as the U.S. “intelligence community” are notoriously adept at closing ranks and closing the information spigot good and tight, but for the occasional, strategic leak. They are hardwired to claim that disclosures of information involving misfeasance and worse would do irreparable harm to national security.

The Trump-Russia inquiry was ingeniously designed. If the president demanded that his subordinates unveil the intelligence files that would reveal the prior administration’s political spying, he stood to be accused of obstructing investigators and seeking to distract the country from his own alleged criminality.

On that score, an underappreciated aspect of the saga is that Trump came to office as a novice. His unhinged Twitter outbursts obscure an abiding uncertainty about the extent of the president’s power to direct the intelligence bureaucracy. A more seasoned Beltway hand would have known what he could safely order reluctant bureaucrats and Obama holdovers to produce for him or disclose to the public. Trump, however, was at sea. That is why it was so vital for his antagonists to sideline Michael Flynn and Jeff Sessions, Trump loyalists with deep experience in intelligence and law enforcement, who could have put a stop to the farce if they’d remained, respectively, national security adviser and attorney general.

Due to the stonewalling, only recently has the paper trail finally begun to catch up to — and, inevitably, verify, and then some — the worst suspicions of “Trump collusion with Russia” naysayers.

We have known for over a year of the special counsel’s finding that there was no evidence of espionage conspiracy, no criminal pact of any kind, between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin. In fact, long before its final report, the Mueller inquiry’s bottom line was already inescapable from the indictments filed by its team of activist Democratic prosecutors. None of them charged Trump associates with any kind of Russian “collusion” (a weasel word invoked to obfuscate the lack of conspiracy).

Since then, the floodgates have begun to open. Justice Department inspector general reports have illuminated shocking FBI misconduct in submissions to the FISA court. There were serial misrepresentations about the strength of evidence; flat-out lies about the veracity of the seminal informant, former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele; and overarching claims that, consistent with Justice Department policy and FISA court rules, each factual assertion in the four warrant submissions against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was “verified,” when, in fact, virtually nothing of consequence had been corroborated.

This inspector general report readily complemented the one completed two years earlier, in connection with the Hillary Clinton emails escapade, which documented rampant anti-Trump bias among key investigators assigned to the Clinton and Trump inquiries — as well as the unusually deep involvement in both cases of the bureau’s highest echelon, then-Director James Comey and then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Also falling into place was another inspector general report, centering on McCabe. He had first orchestrated a leak of investigative information involving a dispute between the FBI and the Obama Justice Department over scrutiny of the Clinton Foundation; then, he made repeated misrepresentations to investigators, including under oath.

Irate, the FISA court forced the Justice Department to conduct a more sweeping internal inquiry. The results have been stunning. While the Trump-Russia investigation stands out for its politicization of surveillance authority, it turns out not to be an outlier in terms of the FBI’s derelictions of investigative duty. In a high percentage of cases, the bureau’s “verified” submissions are never verified, in spite of curative procedures adopted in the 9/11 era, as well as required sign-offs by top FBI and DOJ officials. In short, the FBI and Justice Department have been exploiting the convenience that, contrary to what happens in criminal cases, classified counterintelligence inquiries have no discovery, no defense lawyers, and no one checking the investigators’ work. Rather, there are sloppy representations, made to a judicial monitor that is neither institutionally competent nor practically equipped to investigate the submissions.

Meanwhile, there was the collapse of Robert Mueller’s ill-conceived prosecution of Russian shell companies said to have been instrumental in the “troll-farm” conspiracy. That, we’d been assured, was the social media campaign that, along with hacking, was the one-two punch by which the Putin regime attacked our election.

Mueller’s two Russia indictments, of the troll-farmers and hackers, were always better understood as press releases than criminal prosecutions because everyone knew no Russian would ever be extradited to face the music. But Mueller botched the narrative exercise by charging businesses, evidently not foreseeing that they bore no risks of imprisonment or (as Moscow-based shells) ruinous fines. They retained experienced counsel, who showed up in court, demanded to be given all the discovery, and vowed to take the matter to trial. Ultimately, after first grudgingly conceding that they could not connect the social media ads to the Russian government (though an oligarch said to be close to Vladimir Putin was complicit), prosecutors dismissed the case rather than chance an embarrassing rout at trial. In the run-up, their theory of prosecution was shown to be untenable, and the social media ads themselves were ludicrous — childish, mostly legal under campaign rules, and costing just pennies (the defense claimed the few arguably actionable ones amounted to about $5,000 in expenditures). The suggestion that the troll-farm operation had any effect on the multibillion-dollar ocean of U.S. campaign spending was laughable.

Hacking has taken a hit, too. That is largely because Trump finally dispatched a pit bull to take on the intelligence community. The president eased out acting National Intelligence Director Joseph Maguire, installing in the post Richard Grenell, his hard-charging ambassador to Germany.

Grenell staged a showdown to force Trump nemesis Adam Schiff, the House Intelligence Committee chairman, to disclose hearing testimony from dozens of witnesses that had been kept under wraps for over a year. Among the most startling revelations was the testimony of Shawn Henry, president of CrowdStrike. That is the private cybersecurity firm retained by Democrats to conduct forensic analysis on the party’s servers, whose hacking by Moscow is the collusion narrative’s ne plus ultra. The Obama Justice Department and the FBI could have compelled production of the servers to conduct their own examination. Instead, they delegated to the private firm with deep Democratic ties, notwithstanding the latter’s motive to blame Russia and, derivatively, Trump’s campaign. No wonder Schiff did not want the testimony to see the light of day: Henry admitted — under oath, more than two years ago — that CrowdStrike has no solid evidence that Russian government-directed hackers stole the emails.

More brazen still were the admissions by official after official that they had no proof of any Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia. Publicly, former CIA Director John Brennan intimated that Trump was guilty of treason; former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper suggested he was a Putin asset; McCabe bragged of opening a criminal investigation against the president (for obstruction) after Comey’s firing. But in quiet hearing rooms, under oath, they had nothing. No evidence of conspiracy. The pundits knew that. Schiff and the Democrats who choreographed their testimony knew it. They went on for years, though, encouraging the public and foreign governments to believe the president of the United States could possibly be a Kremlin mole. So did Comey, in bracing public testimony in March 2017, by which time it was already patent that there was no case against Trump and his campaign.

Finally, there is the Flynn prosecution.

Since entering office in 2019, Attorney General William Barr has become increasingly troubled by the Trump-Russia investigation, which he describes, without exaggeration, as “one of the greatest travesties of American history.” Besides assigning Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham to conduct what is a criminal investigation of the inquiry, Barr has also taken to assigning other experienced federal prosecutors from outside Washington to examine the resulting prosecutions. Thus was Jeffrey Jensen, the U.S. attorney for St. Louis, given the ticket to scrutinize the Flynn case. His findings, accompanied by the rollout of previously redacted documents, resulted in the DOJ’s decision to dismiss the case, regardless of Flynn’s guilty plea to a false-statements charge (apparently elicited under the threat that Mueller’s team might otherwise indict his son on a dubious charge of failing to register as a foreign agent, due to work Flynn’s private intelligence firm did for Turkey).

In a nutshell, in July 2016, the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation of Flynn on the baseless theory that he might be a clandestine agent of Russia. Not surprisingly, they were poised to close the case in late December, when Flynn engaged in perfectly appropriate, if ill-fated, communications with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Though Flynn had done nothing wrong, the bureau used the contacts as a pretext to continue the investigation.

Though it had a predicate for neither a counterintelligence nor a criminal investigation, the FBI conducted an ambush interview of Flynn at the White House — Comey has bragged about violating protocol, which would have called for approvals from the attorney general and the White House counsel. The session was an obvious perjury trap. In blatant violation of FBI procedures, the bureau edited the interview notes (the “302 report”) for weeks — a complication necessitated by the facts that, while the agents did not believe Flynn had lied to them, the point of the exercise was to lay the groundwork to get him removed as national security adviser. That plan worked when Trump fired Flynn (for allegedly misleading Vice President Mike Pence about whether he had spoken to Kislyak about Obama-imposed sanctions against Russia). The bureau seemed to drop the matter, but it was revived months later by Mueller’s prosecutors, who were obviously hoping to build an obstruction case against Trump, and to squeeze Flynn into cooperating. The newly disclosed documents demonstrate that the prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence, made misrepresentations to the defense about the genesis of the 302 report, and withheld from the court their agreement not to indict Flynn’s son if he agreed to plead guilty.

Concurrently, Grenell forced the disclosure of documents showing that Flynn’s identity had been “unmasked” an astounding 53 times by 39 different Obama officials in just the few weeks between Trump’s election and his inauguration. (“Unmasking” is the revealing in intelligence reporting of the identities of Americans incidentally intercepted in foreign intelligence monitoring; they are supposed to be concealed, and their revelation facilitates classified leaks.) Ironically, the one time Flynn was not unmasked appears to have been in connection with his Kislyak call in late December. There, the FBI, then consulting directly with the Obama White House, opted not to “mask” him at all, despite FISA procedures calling for doing so. The call was leaked to the Washington Post.

That’s an appropriate note on which to bring us back to the crescendo. Given the brass knuckles Barack Obama’s investigators used on Trump and company, the president’s supporters are unsurprisingly baying for blood. In law enforcement, and especially in foreign counterintelligence, investigative judgments are based on broad discretion, not bright-line rules. It is a far easier thing to spot the abuse of that discretion, especially when all judgments cut in the same politicized direction, than to fit it into an offense of the penal code. Durham is conducting a serious criminal investigation, and we could see some prosecutions, particularly of officials who can be shown to have actionably lied or obstructed justice. But those dreaming of the big indictment of Obama and his top minions will be sorely disappointed.

There are two lessons to be drawn from all this.

First, Barr could not be more right that the malfeasance in our government today is the politicization of law enforcement and intelligence. The only way to fix that is to stop doing it. That cannot be accomplished by bringing what many would see as the most politicized prosecution of all time. The imperative to get the Justice Department and the FBI out of our politics discourages the filing of charges that would be portrayed as banana-republic stuff. Yet, even if Barr succeeds in this noble quest, there is no assurance that a future administration would not turn the clock back.

Second, when wayward officials are not called to account, the powers they have abused become the target of public and congressional ire. The problem is that the powers are essential. Without properly directed foreign counterintelligence, supplemented by legitimate law enforcement, the United States cannot be protected from those who would do her harm.

The Trump-Russia farce has destroyed the bipartisan consensus on counterterrorism, and on the need for aggressive policing against cyberintrusions and other provocations by America’s enemies. There is an implicit understanding: The public endows its national security officials with sweeping secret authorities, and those officials solemnly commit that these authorities will only be used to thwart our enemies, not to spy on Americans or undermine the political process.

That understanding has been fractured. In counterintelligence, government operatives have to be able to look us in the eye and say, “You can trust us.” Americans no longer do. The sentiment is justified. That will not make our consequent vulnerability any less perilous.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/exposing-the-hoax?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true

[boutons_deux]

There is no Trump-Russia farce.

It's Trash/Repug collusion with a much smarter adversary who has been and is working for the degradation of USA

[spurraider21]

Exposing the hoax

By Andrew C. McCarthy
May 28, 2020 - 11:00 PM

No need to build to a crescendo — let’s just say it: The Trump-Russia investigation was a politically driven fraud from beginning to end. It was opened on false pretenses

Shitting all over horowitz tbh

[spurraider21]

He didn’t randomly and unprompted bring it up...he was literally just talking about it. Did you not read the transcript? :lol
Yes. I’ve been posting it.

Flynn - hey, about the diplomats, keep it reciprocal

Kislyak - i hear you. Now what about this GRU and FSB stuff, does that mean the US isn’t going to work with us

Flynn - yeah yeah (going along with him, not literally claiming we won’t be working with them)

kisylak - because that’s our real enemy

flynn - yup

kislyak - but i hear what you’re saying (don’t escalate) and I’ll to get Moscow to understand it

Flynn - yup. And whatever you do, just keep it reciprocal don’t escalate. If we send back 30 people, don’t send back 60. Also brings up that they do have a common enemy in the Middle East


so you read that to mean Flynn abandoned to gru/fsb talk and specifically went back to only talking about diplomats despite the exchange directly leading up to that? That’s just absurd. Especially when in the follow up call kislyak said Russia’s decision not to escalate (referring to sanctions, not just diplomats) was in part thanks to their dialogue about it

[Th'Pusher]

There’s a huge gap between Russia hacked the DNC and we think Russia hacked the DNC but have no proof.

You’re such a dishonest person. Was there evidence that Russia hacked the DNC? I’m no lawyer but I’m pretty sure people are convicted on exclusively circumstantial evidence all the time.

[Spurs Homer]

You’re such a dishonest person. Was there evidence that Russia hacked the DNC? I’m no lawyer but I’m pretty sure people are convicted on exclusively circumstantial evidence all the time.


Russians lie for fun

putin is proud of trump and all his troops who disinform, misinform, and spew propaganda 24/7

tsa is just doing what he was brainwashed/trained to do: swallow lies until he believes the lies and believes the truth is just a matter of red vs blue

[TSA]

You’re such a dishonest person. Was there evidence that Russia hacked the DNC? I’m no lawyer but I’m pretty sure people are convicted on exclusively circumstantial evidence all the time.

I’m dishonest? I’m not the one who claimed Russia hacked the DNC.

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JohnWHuber/status/1267550012818493443

[spurraider21]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JohnWHuber/status/1267550012818493443
most of this rebuttal is nonsensical tbh

i mean at the very end he outright claims that rule 48 requires Sullivan to dismiss, which is patently untrue with a plain reading of the text of rule 48. rule 48 expressly state that the government can dismiss an indictment with leave of court. leave of court = permission from court. nothing in rule 48 states that the court is required to grant leave

court of appeals may grant the writ for all i know, but undercover huber's rebuttals wont be the reason tbh

[ElNono]

full brief:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-716b-d526-a77e-f9ef46250000

[ElNono]

Interesting that Mr Flynn is also apparently a serial liar... also admitted lying to the DOJ about his FARA violations wrt Turkey, which are not addressed at all in the motion to dismiss.

That's going to be problematic.

[spurraider21]

full brief:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-716b-d526-a77e-f9ef46250000
damn... dunking from the 3 point line tbh

the argument that a writ is improper before a decision has even been reached on a motion appears to be fairly bulletproof imho

[spurraider21]

Nothing differs in the Rule 48 context. On the contrary, the Third Circuit denied a similar request for mandamus where a district court sched- uled a hearing on a Rule 48 motion rather than immediately granting it. See In re Richards, 213 F.3d 773, 787 (3d Cir. 2000) (noting that the trial judge “should have the opportunity to consider and issue its order”).

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/SmallHelpfulIndianpangolin-size_restricted.gif

[spurraider21]

its over as it relates to this writ*

for all we know the writ is denied and sullivan ends up granting the motion to dismiss

[ElNono]

its over as it relates to this writ*

for all we know the writ is denied and sullivan ends up granting the motion to dismiss

yeah, and the other interesting tidbit is towards the end, when it says the appeals court might want to hold on to review the entire case, as further disciplinary actions for lying under oath to the court are a possibility too...

And lol @ ignorance of calling out Sullivan not signing this filing. He's basically a defendant in this motion, defendants don't sign motions unless they're representing themselves. :lol Undercover Huber

[Spurs Homer]

Sullivan telling barr to go fuck himself
and

trump too!

[spurraider21]

yeah, and the other interesting tidbit is towards the end, when it says the appeals court might want to hold on to review the entire case, as further disciplinary actions for lying under oath to the court are a possibility too...

And lol @ ignorance of calling out Sullivan not signing this filing. He's basically a defendant in this motion, defendants don't sign motions unless they're representing themselves. :lol Undercover Huber
actual visual representation of sullivan's response


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMElfNC4_oo

[TSA]

its over as it relates to this writ*

for all we know the writ is denied and sullivan ends up granting the motion to dismiss

https://mobile.twitter.com/reeveslawstl/status/1267581133765705730

https://mobile.twitter.com/reeveslawstl/status/1267581139008577537

https://mobile.twitter.com/reeveslawstl/status/1267581140841443337

https://mobile.twitter.com/AndrewCMcCarthy/status/1267586873888833542

[ChumpDumper]

https://mobile.twitter.com/reeveslawstl/status/1267581133765705730

https://mobile.twitter.com/reeveslawstl/status/1267581139008577537

https://mobile.twitter.com/reeveslawstl/status/1267581140841443337

https://mobile.twitter.com/AndrewCMcCarthy/status/1267586873888833542Honestly I've never seen the DOJ begging so hard to lose a case they already won.

Have you?

[ElNono]

Doesn't really matter how the DOJ feels, tbh... they're part of the executive. It actually makes sense they would throw a tantrum.

[TSA]

In a sign of how important DOJ views the underlying constitutional issues in the case, the formal brief to the appellate court wasn’t just signed by the line attorney managing the government’s case. Instead, it was signed by Noel J. Francisco, the Solicitor General of the United States who is tasked with representing the U.S. government in the most important appellate cases across the country; Brian A. Benczkowski, the Assistant Attorney General and head of DOJ’s entire criminal division; Deputy Solicitors General Jeffrey B. Wall and Eric J. Feigin; assistants to the Solicitor General Frederick Liu and Vivek Suri; Michael R. Sherwin, the acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia; Kenneth C. Kohl, the acting Principal Assistant United States Attorney for D.C.; and Jocelyn S. Ballantine, the line prosecutor handling the Flynn case at trial.

[spurraider21]

you arent more likely to get the relief sought just because you really really want it

[TSA]

you arent more likely to get the relief sought just because you really really want it

“The Constitution vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when—and when not—to prosecute potential crimes,” DOJ argued in its brief. Rules of federal criminal procedure, cited by Sullivan in support of his gambit to appoint himself both judge and prosecutor in the inquisition against Flynn, “do[] not authorize a court to stand in the way of a dismissal the defendant does not oppose, and any other reading of [those rules] would violate both Article II and Article III” of the constitution, DOJ wrote.

“Nor, under the circumstances of this case, may the district court assume the role of prosecutor and initiate criminal charges of its own,” the brief continued. “Instead of inviting further proceedings the court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss.”

[ElNono]

The problem for the DOJ is that the court hasn't actually denied the motion. And it may very well rule to accept the motion and close the case in the long run.

[ChumpDumper]

you arent more likely to get the relief sought just because you really really want itBut what if an unusual guy signs it unusually? Like with a fuzzy quill?

[spurraider21]

“The Constitution vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when—and when not—to prosecute potential crimes,” DOJ argued in its brief. Rules of federal criminal procedure, cited by Sullivan in support of his gambit to appoint himself both judge and prosecutor in the inquisition against Flynn, “do[] not authorize a court to stand in the way of a dismissal the defendant does not oppose, and any other reading of [those rules] would violate both Article II and Article III” of the constitution, DOJ wrote.

“Nor, under the circumstances of this case, may the district court assume the role of prosecutor and initiate criminal charges of its own,” the brief continued. “Instead of inviting further proceedings the court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss.”
what they're saying sounds great but is completely contradictory to rule 48, which expressly requires leave of court

[ElNono]

“The Constitution vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when—and when not—to prosecute potential crimes,” DOJ argued in its brief. Rules of federal criminal procedure, cited by Sullivan in support of his gambit to appoint himself both judge and prosecutor in the inquisition against Flynn, “do[] not authorize a court to stand in the way of a dismissal the defendant does not oppose, and any other reading of [those rules] would violate both Article II and Article III” of the constitution, DOJ wrote.

“Nor, under the circumstances of this case, may the district court assume the role of prosecutor and initiate criminal charges of its own,” the brief continued. “Instead of inviting further proceedings the court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss.”

Judge Sullivan actually pointed out that the court is not going to assume "the role of prosecutor and initiate criminal charges", so that's really moot.

Like I said, the problem for the DOJ with this mandamus is that the court hasn't ruled on the motion yet.

[ElNono]

There's also no mention in that brief about the other two charges of lying to the DOJ, which were part of the plea agreement. That's going to be problematic.

[spurraider21]

There's also no mention in that brief about the other two charges of lying to the DOJ, which were part of the plea agreement. That's going to be problematic.
assuming this writ is denied, if sullivan did take the step of denying the motion to dismiss, i am fascinated by how that appeal would go

[ElNono]

Obviously, the appeals court might favor political favoritism too, at which point, there would be nobody with standing to take on an appeal. So we'll see what the appeals court decides.

[DMC]

You don't get to 3 star general level without lying.

[spurraider21]

You don't get to 3 star general level without lying.
the real question is, did he lie when he told the lie, or did he lie when he admitted that he lied

[ElNono]

assuming this writ is denied, if sullivan did take the step of denying the motion to dismiss, i am fascinated by how that appeal would go

I think the issue here is that the amici would be used to argue against dismissing the motion. And so the amici influence, so far, seems circumscribed to just that, and doesn't seem to involve further proceedings.

Obviously, while the court can't bring charges itself, they can impose court sanctions, like obstruction of justice or lying under oath to the court.

Question, is there a possibility that the judge can call for a retrial just on the turkey charges? And how would that look? Especially if this drags after November?

[ElNono]

You don't get to 3 star general level without lying.

That might be good career advice, it just doesn't work out when you get caught doing it in court.

[ElNono]

The funny thing too is that while the appeals court can certainly compel the lower court to grant the motion, the lower court can also issue the penalties before doing so. Ultimately, it all comes back to Sullivan, one way or another.

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267580122288152576

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267580128214675458

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267580132220268544

[Spurs Homer]

So Noel Francisco signed up with the cult!

Nice

Won't matter though - Sullivan is going to make Flynn make a fucking choice -

Perjury?

or Reinstate the charges that Mueller had on Flynn before Flynn pleaded guilty and took the deal to drop the charges of his turkey crimes.

[DMC]

the real question is, did he lie when he told the lie, or did he lie when he admitted that he lied

tbh

[TSA]

So Noel Francisco signed up with the cult!

Nice

Won't matter though - Sullivan is going to make Flynn make a fucking choice -

Perjury?

or Reinstate the charges that Mueller had on Flynn before Flynn pleaded guilty and took the deal to drop the charges of his turkey crimes.

https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267670028242915331

Is Jocelyn Ballentine part of the cult too?

[Spurs Homer]

https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267670028242915331

Is Jocelyn Ballentine part of the cult too?

the woman senior FBI agent who wrote an op-ed saying Barr twisted her words in her prosecution report of flynn can testify

she doesnt appear to be in the cult!

[spurraider21]

“The Constitution vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when—and when not—to prosecute potential crimes,” DOJ argued in its brief. Rules of federal criminal procedure, cited by Sullivan in support of his gambit to appoint himself both judge and prosecutor in the inquisition against Flynn, “do[] not authorize a court to stand in the way of a dismissal the defendant does not oppose, and any other reading of [those rules] would violate both Article II and Article III” of the constitution, DOJ wrote.

“Nor, under the circumstances of this case, may the district court assume the role of prosecutor and initiate criminal charges of its own,” the brief continued. “Instead of inviting further proceedings the court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss.”
He’s not initiating charges or prosecuting anyone. There is already a guilty plea and sentencing is within a judge’s domain

[spurraider21]

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267580122288152576

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267580128214675458

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1267580132220268544
Fokker was mentioned 15 times in the brief. To act like they didn’t address it is just being dishonest.

[spurraider21]

so lets take a gander at this here thread...


https://mobile.twitter.com/JohnWHuber/status/1267550012818493443
so naturally undercover huber opens up with an ad hominem attack. as ElNono pointed out, judge sullivan is effectively a litigant in this appeal, and a judge who does not write argumentative briefs for a living (anymore) would certainly outsource it. it also makes no sense for a represented party to sign a pleading :lol

1267550024512217088
not familiar with Van Grack ever agreeing on this point. can you point me to this admission?

and Flynn's guilty plea was described in the statement of the offense, which clearly included his lies about his work for turkey.

1267550030744911872
undercoverhuber ignoring what immediately follows :lol. sullivan did not just rely on the civl rules. he also cites to other criminal matters where amici have been used

https://i.gyazo.com/e764630118e8bf105aeca4f438ffa4fb.png
https://i.gyazo.com/b24ce768c371bcf2dba7b38848b7ea3c.png

1267550038265417732
why not? any law supporting this? sullivan has done this before without issue. there's also a reason leave of court is required

https://i.gyazo.com/92fc2e0b2bdfcfb3d19b8a26c74dba0a.png
https://i.gyazo.com/a283a59f841a9d26c5fc53ad04e9de80.png

1267550044120629256

this is pure snark. sullivan is arguing that this writ is premature because there has been no ruling yet. you can petition the court of appeals to change a ruling that the trial/district court made, but you cant ask them to step in and grant an order before there has even been a ruling. the motion to dismiss has not yet been denied, so there is nothing to overturn, certainly nothing that requires extraordinary relief at this point

https://i.gyazo.com/225a60678898f7c4825b9b4bfc766339.png

1267550051838148608
:lol "false"

you dont get to decide what the judge found or didnt find

https://i.gyazo.com/25e15e92b17079891a61cd38bcd7b256.png
and here is the portion from that opinion
https://i.gyazo.com/80af4aa71416770b426b2fddbb5d02e6.png

https://www.scribd.com/document/440008649/Sullivan-Memorandum-Opinion (https://www.scribd.com/document/440008649/Sullivan-Memorandum-Opinion)

i'll continue this in a separate post

[spurraider21]

1267550057169117192

again, this type of stuff is pure snark. carries no weight

1267550057169117192

he never said that line attorneys were required, so theres no "conspiracy theory" here, which is a weird way to characterize an alleged mistake in law.

he said it was noteworthy. he's also right that the government hasn't provided any declarations to justify/corroborate the change in facts.

1267550069865185280

incredible!

how can you claim ignore he "ignored" the declaration when he decided, in turn, to delay sentencing? he also hasn't "ignored" it because he hasnt denied the motion to dismiss, which would be based, in part, on that declaration

1267550077113053190
snark, snark

1267550082691465218
he said flynn does not face COMPARABLE harm to the case that he discussed on the previous page, not that he faces "no real" harm as undercoverhuber claims

the actual harm was addressed by sullivan. delay alone (which contemplates legal fees) is insufficient

https://i.gyazo.com/d0c0d4d191291f4de0196da195ae1b7c.png
https://i.gyazo.com/6896a95091ab63db27ca9d38f6318c21.png

1267550084494954496
:lol no. rule 48 expressly requires leave of court. that is the opposite of him being "required" to dismiss. otherwise it would just be a ministerial function, which it isn't.

https://i.gyazo.com/a60626ecbe50fc186c6f4d9760a4419d.png

[ElNono]

Fokker was mentioned 15 times in the brief.

And it should be noted that Fokker required dismissal ONLY because there was a very specific, timing-dependent matter wrt expiration of statutes in that case. That was the substantiation to that particular case.

There's no such thing at play here.

[TSA]

spurraider21 I appreciate you taking the time to go through those line by line, it's informative and entertaining.

Here is another for you to take a stab at.

The Filing by Judge Sullivan With The Circuit Court Is A Joke.

https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/06/02/846660/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[spurraider21]

spurraider21 (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=31905) I appreciate you taking the time to go through those line by line, it's informative and entertaining.

Here is another for you to take a stab at.

The Filing by Judge Sullivan With The Circuit Court Is A Joke.

https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/06/02/846660/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
:tu it was fun

like i've been saying throughout this whole saga, im much more interested in the legal components of whats going on. when i read through the tweet thread yesterday i remember chuckling to myself. had a good amount of free time this morning so i decided to actually run through it.

as for this other one, maybe, at a later time.

but can you address my first question in 50585? maybe i just dont remember or couldnt find it, but when did Van Grack ever acknowledge or admit flynn did not plead guilty for lies about turkey or that they didnt address intent?

[ElNono]

I'll take a stab...

1) While Sullivan might have had some or any doubt in March 2018, his Memorandum of Opinion on December 2019 (linked by sr21 above) is pretty clear about what he thinks on materiality. Furthermore, it applies that to both the FBI and FARA violations admissions.

2) The notion that "Van Grack used the “magic words”, Judge Sullivan repeated the “magic words”, and viola, Gen. Flynn was guilty" glosses over the fact that Flynn was guilty because he pleaded to be. He was asked a multitude of times if he understood what he was agreeing to by the judge, to which he replied yes every time. That's how pleas normally work.

3) "in Fokker Services the Circuit Court said that charging decisions by the Executive Branch are not subject to second-guessing by the Judiciary under any form of “discretionary review” authority conferred by any statute or rule of procedure."... the problem with this statement is that there's no discretionary review going on here. Sullivan isn't conducting a review, he simply hasn't ruled yet on the motion. That argument makes sense if he denied the motion, but he hasn't done so yet, which is why the writ is premature.

4) Another analysis that doesn't touch on the issue that Flynn not only admitted to lying to the FBI, but also to the DOJ multiple times wrt FARA violations. All charges are part of his plea agreement. The DOJ moved to dismiss on all charges even though they only presented support for that on the materiality for the FBI charge. This is, at the very least, extremely sloppy and a big reason why Judge Sullivan is probably uneasy with just granting the motion. It also unfortunately opens the door for judicial sanctions against Flynn, unless the DOJ supplements their motion (which they could do, they're the DOJ after all) explaining why there was no materiality on the lies about the FARA violation(s).

[TSA]

:tu it was fun

like i've been saying throughout this whole saga, im much more interested in the legal components of whats going on. when i read through the tweet thread yesterday i remember chuckling to myself. had a good amount of free time this morning so i decided to actually run through it.

as for this other one, maybe, at a later time.

but can you address my first question in 50585? maybe i just dont remember or couldnt find it, but when did Van Grack ever acknowledge or admit flynn did not plead guilty for lies about turkey or that they didnt address intent?

I seem to remember Van Grack admitting such but not sure. Came out around same time as this submission I believe.

“Mr. Van Grack was determined that Mr. Flynn would testify in the Rafiekian case that he had knowingly signed a false [Foreign Agents Registration Act] registration, even though Mr. Van Grack knew that was not true and Mr. Flynn had not agreed to that in the course of his plea agreement,” Flynn’s attorneys wrote. “Mr. Flynn’s refusal to get on the witness stand and lie for the government on that point prompted a heated tirade from Mr. Van Grack with Mr. Flynn’s lead counsel, in which Mr. Van Grack claimed Mr. Flynn had agreed to plead to a knowing and intentional false FARA filing.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.121.0.pdf

No time for me to dig any further as I can hear my 2.5 year waking up from his nap and he’s in a full arm cast with a broken Ulna and wrist. Happened the day before his daycare opened back up this week and now he can’t go and my wife and I are back to having to both rotate working from home lockdown style and unfortunately having to have him watch way more movies throughout the day then we prefer. Lockdown turned him into a real asshole and now this. Fun times :lol

[spurraider21]

I'll take a stab...

1) While Sullivan might have had some or any doubt in March 2018, his Memorandum of Opinion on December 2019 (linked by sr21 above) is pretty clear about what he thinks on materiality. Furthermore, it applies that to both the FBI and FARA violations admissions.

2) The notion that "Van Grack used the “magic words”, Judge Sullivan repeated the “magic words”, and viola, Gen. Flynn was guilty" glosses over the fact that Flynn was guilty because he pleaded to be. He was asked a multitude of times if he understood what he was agreeing to by the judge, to which he replied yes every time. That's how pleas normally work.

3) "in Fokker Services the Circuit Court said that charging decisions by the Executive Branch are not subject to second-guessing by the Judiciary under any form of “discretionary review” authority conferred by any statute or rule of procedure."... the problem with this statement is that there's no discretionary review going on here. Sullivan isn't conducting a review, he simply hasn't ruled yet on the motion. That argument makes sense if he denied the motion, but he hasn't done so yet, which is why the writ is premature.

4) Another analysis that doesn't touch on the issue that Flynn not only admitted to lying to the FBI, but also to the DOJ multiple times wrt FARA violations. All charges are part of his plea agreement. The DOJ moved to dismiss on all charges even though they only presented support for that on the materiality for the FBI charge. This is, at the very least, extremely sloppy and a big reason why Judge Sullivan is probably uneasy with just granting the motion. It also unfortunately opens the door for judicial sanctions against Flynn, unless the DOJ supplements their motion (which they could do, they're the DOJ after all) explaining why there was no materiality on the lies about the FARA violation(s).
sullivan expressly asked him if he wanted to speak with his counsel and decide to withdraw his guilty plea. flynn said nah im good, i'm guilty

[ElNono]

I seem to remember Van Grack admitting such but not sure. Came out around same time as this submission I believe.

“Mr. Van Grack was determined that Mr. Flynn would testify in the Rafiekian case that he had knowingly signed a false [Foreign Agents Registration Act] registration, even though Mr. Van Grack knew that was not true and Mr. Flynn had not agreed to that in the course of his plea agreement,” Flynn’s attorneys wrote. “Mr. Flynn’s refusal to get on the witness stand and lie for the government on that point prompted a heated tirade from Mr. Van Grack with Mr. Flynn’s lead counsel, in which Mr. Van Grack claimed Mr. Flynn had agreed to plead to a knowing and intentional false FARA filing.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.121.0.pdf

No time for me to dig any further as I can hear my 2.5 year waking up from his nap and he’s in a full arm cast with a broken Ulna and wrist. Happened the day before his daycare opened back up this week and now he can’t go and my wife and I are back to having to both rotate working from home lockdown style and unfortunately having to have him watch way more movies throughout the day then we prefer. Lockdown turned him into a real asshole and now this. Fun times :lol

uh brah... take care of that kiddo.

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/GeorgePapa19/status/1267856311028289537?s=19

[ElNono]

^ lol @ that dog and pony show with the shit that's going on

[spurraider21]

uh brah... take care of that kiddo.
sounds like the kid was a protester tbh

[ElNono]

sounds like the kid was a protester tbh

:lol

[Spurs Homer]

Rod Rosenstein testifies before the partisan hack Senate traitors led by Leningrad Lindsey and the corpse of Frankenfeinstein....


Pearl clutching by repukes regarding (brace yourself) FISA process mistakes...

vs.

truth seeking Dems who might still give a shit about our russian puppets treason.


Rosenstein is a weasel of weasels but even he is not stupid enough to put himself in legal danger so maybe the truth of how russia and trump and barr betrayed the us can be exposed -

not holding my breath - but will probably watch this shitshow!


On CSPAN at 9am Central time....

[TSA]

Rod Rosenstein testifies before the partisan hack Senate traitors led by Leningrad Lindsey and the corpse of Frankenfeinstein....


Pearl clutching by repukes regarding (brace yourself) FISA process mistakes...

vs.

truth seeking Dems who might still give a shit about our russian puppets treason.


Rosenstein is a weasel of weasels but even he is not stupid enough to put himself in legal danger so maybe the truth of how russia and trump and barr betrayed the us can be exposed -

not holding my breath - but will probably watch this shitshow!


On CSPAN at 9am Central time....

https://mobile.twitter.com/15poundstogo/status/1267953875128070144

[Spurs Homer]

Here are some questions for rosenstein that i am pretty fucking sure NO ONE will ask:


What authority did Mueller have (or not have) to investigate and prosecute:

trump?
trump jr?
jared cuckner?
ivanka ?



Who gave Mueller the order and if it was you - what input from bill barr or the white house - were you given?

Did anyone order you to restrain mueller from investigating anyone in the trump family?

Why did your memo/order to Mueller ONLY mention manafort,cohen, page, and stone specifically?
Why did Mueller need to be given an order of the above 4 people and specifically state that these specific individuals could be investigated?

Was this an order to prevent Mueller from investigating anyone OUTSIDE of this very strict specific scope of people?

[Spurs Homer]

Since Leningrad Lindsey is the chair of this shitshow- I am recording it...

pretty sure Leningrad Lindsey will take the first hour to clutch his pearls and paint the entire proceeding as some righteous “poor donnie trump got screwed” by the meanie deep state and do his drama queen routine to give FAUX news some good snippets to show on Hannity tonite.

ill fast-forward to the testimony...after the pearl clutching...

[Spurs Homer]

Update:

Leningrad Lindsey reads a Putin-approved script while clutching pearls = basically russian propaganda.

Corpse of Frankenfeinstein: states FACTS.

[Spurs Homer]

Rosenstein is fully in the cult

didnt take long to see how Rosenstein and Leningrad Lindsey are reciting parts they practiced together already...


Rosenstein trying to throw shade on McCabe that mccabe was not “candid”


mccabe and comey and wray and others KNEW that rosenstein was scum and wrote a letter to fire comey to help the traitor

before the traitor threw rosenstein under the bus lol

[Spurs Homer]

One thing is clear;


after trump/barr are out of office


an independent - truly INDEPENDENT commission is needed to properly investigate this entire treason.

Rosenstein is a disgrace to law enforcement.

[Spurs Homer]

Lol

MUeller report = 448 pages

7;pages relate to Carter Page

441;pages=. Other treason


GOP = FISA! Carter Page! Illegitimate investigation!

[Spurs Homer]

Just noticed

FOX news is airing this


lol


the fix is in!

Rosenstein will be on FOX/OANN soon!

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1268192916192866304

:lol McCabe

[Spurs Homer]

Piece of shit rosenstein...

durbin: “do you believe the russia investigation was a corrupt biased investigation?”

rosenstein: “ no ...er uh.. but i do understand the presidents frustration....blah- blah fucking disgraceful cunt pussy...


no proper lawman excuses the criminal when asked if the criminal committed a crime which he know was in fact committed


you dont hear ANY lawman in history


speaking about a murderer...


”uh...i do agree he murdered ...uh but i can understand the murderer’s frustration with the fbi investigating his murder!”


just a sackless pussy that is terrified of barr and his traitors outing his own treason


never in my life have i witnessed such a bunch of turncoats defending treason


what a sad piece of shit country we have now

[Spurs Homer]

Senator Whitehouse going balls deep


asking for house repuke traitors to be investigated for corrupting the russia investigation in the house with orders from the white house

traitor rosenstein looked like a deer in headlights when asked why the fbi under his watch refused to answer zero questions


and would not answer as to who ORDERED the fbi to refuse to comply

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/themarketswork/status/1268213858528718848

[ElNono]

"it has enormous ramifications"... in twitter?

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/status/1268192916192866304

:lol McCabe

https://twitter.com/alaynatreene/status/1268224788436320257

:lol McCabe

[boutons_deux]

Graham with the dyed Blonde Aryan Master Race hairdo

SIEG HEIL, you racist, dickless, slimebag mofo

‘Cannot unsee’:

Lindsey Graham’s new Trump-like hair color overshadows Rosenstein hearing


https://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/EZmAJT6XkAA2IUj-2.jpg

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/cannot-unsee-lindsey-grahams-new-trump-like-hair-color-overshadows-rosenstein-hearing/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4704

[ElNono]

I don't think McCabe is anywhere near a saint, the problem with these 'inquiries' is that they're pure show for the crowd.

As soon as they land on a court, the first thing that happens are claims of executive privilege, especially on the administration side, so this is why it's difficult to take it seriously.

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/dbongino/status/1268252257021296644?s=19

[spurraider21]

https://twitter.com/dbongino/status/1268252257021296644?s=19
theres a disconnect there... he is correct that they conducted an investigation and decided that they should not bring charges on obstruction. however, he's not really addressing that they came to that conclusion because it was determined that they do not have the legal standing to bring such charges. there was never a claim, at least not in the report, that they declined to bring charges because the evidence was insufficient

[TSA]

Here are some questions for rosenstein that i am pretty fucking sure NO ONE will ask:


What authority did Mueller have (or not have) to investigate and prosecute:

trump?
trump jr?
jared cuckner?
ivanka ?



Who gave Mueller the order and if it was you - what input from bill barr or the white house - were you given?

Did anyone order you to restrain mueller from investigating anyone in the trump family?

Why did your memo/order to Mueller ONLY mention manafort,cohen, page, and stone specifically?
Why did Mueller need to be given an order of the above 4 people and specifically state that these specific individuals could be investigated?

Was this an order to prevent Mueller from investigating anyone OUTSIDE of this very strict specific scope of people?

Rosenstein testified the scope memo was drafted by the Special Counsel's Office :lmao

[Spurs Homer]

Rosenstein testified the scope memo was drafted by the Special Counsel's Office :lmao


so?


none of those questions i posted were asked...


irrelevant comrade...

[TSA]

so?


none of those questions i posted were asked...


irrelevant comrade...

What part of the Special Counsel’s Office drafted the scope memo and chose who they investigated are you having trouble understanding you stupid fuck? :lmao

[Spurs Homer]

What part of the Special Counsel’s Office drafted the scope memo and chose who they investigated are you having trouble understanding you stupid fuck? :lmao

you couldn’ even get through your first sentence without lying

”chose who they investigated”


is your invention


but this is what russians do you piece of shit.

We’ll see what happens when the mueller report is uncovered and unredacted

and when an independent investigation of these traitors is uncovered

[TSA]

you couldn’ even get through your first sentence without lying

”chose who they investigated”


is your invention


but this is what russians do you piece of shit.

We’ll see what happens when the mueller report is uncovered and unredacted

and when an independent investigation of these traitors is uncovered

What part of the Special Counsel’s Office drafted the scope memo and chose who they investigated are you having trouble understanding you stupid fuck? :lmao

[Spurs Homer]

What part of the Special Counsel’s Office drafted the scope memo and chose who they investigated are you having trouble understanding you stupid fuck? :lmao


I never heard Rosenstein testify to those words -

but if you have a clip - post it.

After watching the sham and the republicans working as agents of Russia - I stopped watching.

Watching Rosenstein cover for trump and barr - was enough to stop watching the sham.

The truth will come out when barr and trump are out and cannot cover up their crimes.

[TSA]

I never heard Rosenstein testify to those words -

but if you have a clip - post it.

After watching the sham and the republicans working as agents of Russia - I stopped watching.

Watching Rosenstein cover for trump and barr - was enough to stop watching the sham.

The truth will come out when barr and trump are out and cannot cover up their crimes.

tiNjSYbRfd4

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/BrookeSingman/status/1268559275074428930

https://twitter.com/BrookeSingman/status/1268560819228418050

https://twitter.com/BrookeSingman/status/1268561479181139969

[Spurs Homer]

https://twitter.com/BrookeSingman/status/1268559275074428930

https://twitter.com/BrookeSingman/status/1268560819228418050

https://twitter.com/BrookeSingman/status/1268561479181139969


If you have paid ANY attention for the last 4-5 years


you would immediately know that Ron Johnson is working directly for Russia.


Just pay attention - but you wont

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/MSNBCPR/status/1269006499789049856

:lol MSNBC

[spurraider21]

https://twitter.com/MSNBCPR/status/1269006499789049856

:lol MSNBC
thats funny tbh :lol

honestly though, its pretty difficult to beat Mark Fuhrman being a "forensic and crime scene expert" for Fox

[Spurs Homer]

thats funny tbh :lol

honestly though, its pretty difficult to beat Mark Fuhrman being a "forensic and crime scene expert" for Fox


Why?

She did her job and at least cares about russia co-opting one of our citizens to destroy us.

History will show her to be a patriot.

[spurraider21]

This message is hidden because Spurs Homer is on your ignore list (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/profile.php?do=ignorelist).

[koriwhat]

Why?

She did her job and at least cares about russia co-opting one of our citizens to destroy us.

History will show her to be a patriot.

Lol she's nothing but a commie whore who needs to lay off the adderall.

[ElNono]

Feds press criminal case against Flynn partner

The Justice Department is pressing forward with its criminal case against a former business partner of Michael Flynn, despite Attorney General William Barr’s controversial decision to seek to abandon the prosecution of the former national security adviser to President Donald Trump.
Prosecutors seeking to revive the convictions of Flynn’s former colleague, Bijan Rafiekian, filed a brief with a federal appeals court Sunday.
The filing (https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-91eb-dd0c-ab73-ffef7a9f0000) makes several mentions of Flynn’s integral role in the work that led to the two foreign-agent-related felony charges against Rafiekian and maintains the government’s position that Flynn was a co-conspirator in his business partner’s crimes — a curious stance as the government seeks to drop the criminal case it brought against Flynn more than two years ago.


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/07/criminal-case-rafiekian-flynn-partner-306881

[Spurs Homer]

Feds press criminal case against Flynn partner

The Justice Department is pressing forward with its criminal case against a former business partner of Michael Flynn, despite Attorney General William Barr’s controversial decision to seek to abandon the prosecution of the former national security adviser to President Donald Trump.
Prosecutors seeking to revive the convictions of Flynn’s former colleague, Bijan Rafiekian, filed a brief with a federal appeals court Sunday.
The filing (https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-91eb-dd0c-ab73-ffef7a9f0000) makes several mentions of Flynn’s integral role in the work that led to the two foreign-agent-related felony charges against Rafiekian and maintains the government’s position that Flynn was a co-conspirator in his business partner’s crimes — a curious stance as the government seeks to drop the criminal case it brought against Flynn more than two years ago.


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/07/criminal-case-rafiekian-flynn-partner-306881


Maybe this turk didnt donate enough $$$ to trumps criminal family?

[TSA]

Feds press criminal case against Flynn partner

The Justice Department is pressing forward with its criminal case against a former business partner of Michael Flynn, despite Attorney General William Barr’s controversial decision to seek to abandon the prosecution of the former national security adviser to President Donald Trump.
Prosecutors seeking to revive the convictions of Flynn’s former colleague, Bijan Rafiekian, filed a brief with a federal appeals court Sunday.
The filing (https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-91eb-dd0c-ab73-ffef7a9f0000) makes several mentions of Flynn’s integral role in the work that led to the two foreign-agent-related felony charges against Rafiekian and maintains the government’s position that Flynn was a co-conspirator in his business partner’s crimes — a curious stance as the government seeks to drop the criminal case it brought against Flynn more than two years ago.


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/07/criminal-case-rafiekian-flynn-partner-306881

They’ll get their dick slapped just like they did the first time they tried him.

“There is no substantial evidence that Rafiekian agreed to operate subject to the direction or control of the Turkish government,” Trenga wrote as he ordered the acquittal of the 67-year-old Iranian-American businessman and former board member for the U.S. Export-Import Bank.

“There is no evidence of any statements by Rafiekian that would allow a rational juror to find that Rafiekian had agreed to operate as an agent of the Turkish government, or that he thought he was acting as a Turkish agent,” the judge added.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/25/judge-overturns-guilty-verdicts-bijan-rafiekian-1510719

[ElNono]

They’ll get their dick slapped just like they did the first time they tried him.

“There is no substantial evidence that Rafiekian agreed to operate subject to the direction or control of the Turkish government,” Trenga wrote as he ordered the acquittal of the 67-year-old Iranian-American businessman and former board member for the U.S. Export-Import Bank.

“There is no evidence of any statements by Rafiekian that would allow a rational juror to find that Rafiekian had agreed to operate as an agent of the Turkish government, or that he thought he was acting as a Turkish agent,” the judge added.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/25/judge-overturns-guilty-verdicts-bijan-rafiekian-1510719

Well, the prosecution certainly was expecting their star witness to cooperate. The other problem in this case is the jury found him guilty on both counts, thus the appeal.

[spurraider21]

Well, the prosecution certainly was expecting their star witness to cooperate. The other problem in this case is the jury found him guilty on both counts, thus the appeal.
dick slappedPERIOD

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/adamhousley/status/1270060960011542529

[ElNono]

Better hurry up, tbh, the dog and pony show only works out before November...

[boutons_deux]

A federal judge

who accused Barr of ‘distorting’ the Mueller report

has read an unredacted version —

and now he’s demanding some answers

U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, according to Law & Crime’s Matt Naham (https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/federal-judge-after-reading-the-unredacted-mueller-report-orders-doj-to-explain-itself-at-hearing/amp/?__twitter_impression=true), has

ordered the U.S. Department of Justice to answer questions “regarding certain redactions of the Mueller Report” at a hearing now set for July 20.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/a-federal-judge-who-accused-barr-of-distorting-the-mueller-report-has-read-an-unredacted-version-and-now-hes-demanding-some-answers/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4745 (https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/a-federal-judge-who-accused-barr-of-distorting-the-mueller-report-has-read-an-unredacted-version-and-now-hes-demanding-some-answers/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4745)

Barr will NOT comply

[Spurs Homer]

A federal judge

who accused Barr of ‘distorting’ the Mueller report

has read an unredacted version —

and now he’s demanding some answers

U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, according to Law & Crime’s Matt Naham (https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/federal-judge-after-reading-the-unredacted-mueller-report-orders-doj-to-explain-itself-at-hearing/amp/?__twitter_impression=true), has

ordered the U.S. Department of Justice to answer questions “regarding certain redactions of the Mueller Report” at a hearing now set for July 20.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/a-federal-judge-who-accused-barr-of-distorting-the-mueller-report-has-read-an-unredacted-version-and-now-hes-demanding-some-answers/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4745 (https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/a-federal-judge-who-accused-barr-of-distorting-the-mueller-report-has-read-an-unredacted-version-and-now-hes-demanding-some-answers/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4745)

Barr will NOT comply

Judge Sullivan read some unredacted russia docs and called flynn a traitor

now this judge reads a part of the mueller report - unredacted


of course Barr is going to continue the cover up

the SCOTUS cunts also delaying the mueller report being uncovered until after the election also

[TSA]

Better hurry up, tbh, the dog and pony show only works out before November...

The dog and pony show ended when Mueller ended his investigation.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1270506615293296640

https://mobile.twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1270507423850266626

[DMC]

Better hurry up, tbh, the dog and pony show only works out before November...

January actually.

[DMC]

thats funny tbh :lol

honestly though, its pretty difficult to beat Mark Fuhrman being a "forensic and crime scene expert" for Fox

Does he have Kato as a sidekick?

[ElNono]

The dog and pony show ended when Mueller ended his investigation.

Actually, if Biden wins, the Mueller show is only getting started in January, provided documents are not incinerated.

Barr, especially, show probably hire an attorney, despite him being one.

If POTUS is re-elected, then we might get an extended version of this show.


January actually.

There's little political value once the election is over with.

[Splits]

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.223.2_3.pdf


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaKmJbVWAAA1aIU?format=png&name=900x900
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaKpmw0XkAEdJ5y?format=jpg&name=large

[TSA]

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.223.2_3.pdf


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaKmJbVWAAA1aIU?format=png&name=900x900
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaKpmw0XkAEdJ5y?format=jpg&name=large:sleep

[spurraider21]

:lol tbh... this talking point has always been the funniest

https://i.gyazo.com/adab11b3914a995d5b50240c21425389.png
https://i.gyazo.com/7139d21bdca91ff8bef7660b2885faf9.png

[spurraider21]

of course of Flynn's writ petition is granted, this amicus brief will be moot, though i think that's pretty unlikely

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/McAdooGordon/status/1270803163424178177

https://twitter.com/McAdooGordon/status/1270804356921733120

[spurraider21]

https://twitter.com/McAdooGordon/status/1270803163424178177

https://twitter.com/McAdooGordon/status/1270804356921733120
oh oh, i know how to address this

:sleep

[Spurs Homer]

In other words....


exactly everything we have all seen with our own eyes.

Barr is corrupt and the DOJ corrupted this case because- trump said to do it and Barr obeyed.

[TSA]

oh oh, i know how to address this

Did Gleeson deal with the separation of powers issue?

[spurraider21]

Did Gleeson deal with the separation of powers issue?
yes

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.223.2_3.pdf

there's a section literally titled "The Role of Constitutional Separation of Powers Principles" beginning on page 29. see footnotes on page 32 and 38 as well

he just doesnt reach the same conclusions your twitter lawyer de jure wanted. which is fine, this is an argumentative brief. sullivan hasn't made any ruling on the motion to dismiss yet, and he might be reach the same conclusions lawyer de jure did too, and elect to grant the motion to dismiss.

with that said, oral arguments for the writ are going to be heard in 2 days, and if we get a same-day ruling, then maybe by some (imo improbable) chance, the writ is granted and the dismissal is entered on the spot, rendering this brief moot

[TSA]

yes

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.223.2_3.pdf

there's a section literally titled "The Role of Constitutional Separation of Powers Principles" beginning on page 29. see footnotes on page 32 and 38 as well

he just doesnt reach the same conclusions your twitter lawyer de jure wanted. which is fine, this is an argumentative brief. sullivan hasn't made any ruling on the motion to dismiss yet, and he might be reach the same conclusions lawyer de jure did too, and elect to grant the motion to dismiss.

with that said, oral arguments for the writ are going to be heard in 2 days, and if we get a same-day ruling, then maybe by some (imo improbable) chance, the writ is granted and the dismissal is entered on the spot, rendering this brief moot

She’s not my twitter lawyer de jure, this guy is. :bobo

The Historical Basis of Rule 48(a)

DOJ has moved to dismiss the Flynn prosecution under Fed. Rule of Crim. Proc. 48(a), which provides for such motions by the government “with leave of court” — meaning with the court’s permission. The crux of the dispute concerns the extent of the court’s discretion to say “No” to such motions.

Judge Gleeson stakes a great deal of his reliance on the “historical context” for the creation of Rule 48(a)’s “leave of court” language on a law review article written by Thomas Frampton, which is scheduled to be published in the Stanford Law Review in the Fall of 2020. This article has been bouncing around the anti-Flynn advocates on the internet since DOJ made its motion. And the current “Draft” of the article, which is what Judge Gleeson cites to in his brief, says right at the top that Government’s motion in the Flynn case is a central aspect for why the article exists. I’m not saying Frampton wrote the article because of the Flynn case — I think its clear that it was a work in progress for a much longer period — but it is clear that the current version of the article is written with the intention to bolster the idea that Judge Sullivan has the authority to deny the motion based on the history of the language of Rule 48(a). Gleeson cites the Frampton article 7 different times, but his citations are to Frampton’s words, not the words of a Court or Judge. Examples of Frampton’s statements which Gleeson cites/quotes include the following:

Rule 48(a) was designed to “guard against dubious dismissals of criminal cases that would benefit powerful and well-connected defendants.”

This text [“leave of court”] reflects a considered judicial effort to “guard against dubious dismissals of criminal cases that would benefit powerful and well-connected defendants.”

The Court . . . armed the district judge with a powerful tool to halt corrupt or politically motivated dismissals of cases.

In contrast, separation of powers concerns have significantly less force in the post-plea setting, where “all that is left for the trial court to do is sentence the defendant, a task that is firmly in the district judge’s wheelhouse.”

Those are all the words of a Harvard Law School “Fellow” and “Lecturer” who is the author of the article — not a court or a judge. While law review articles are sometimes “enlightening”, they do not carry any significant weight as legal authority. The fact that Gleeson makes repeated use of the Frampton article is an indicator as to the weakness of his argument on this point.

Finally — for this article — I want to call attention to Gleenson’s citation to a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal Decision which Gleeson describes as “influential” — US v. Hamm.

Hamm was an en banc decision, which means that all active judges in the Fifth Circuit participated in the case, and the outcome reflected the consensus of all those Appeals Court Judges. This is also noteworthy because Hamm comes AFTER the case of US v. Cowan, another Fifth Circuit case one that figures very prominently in anti-Flynn argument that Judge Sullivan should deny the motion. More on Cowan in another article.

As for Hamm, here is what Judge Gleeson has to say regarding its significance:

As the Fifth Circuit framed the issue in an influential opinion, “we must balance the constitutional duty of government prosecutors, as members of the
Executive Branch, to ‘take care that the laws (are) faithfully executed’ with the constitutional powers of the federal courts.”

Judge Gleeson never addresses WHAT ELSE the Fifth Circuit had to say in Hamm.

Just to set things up — Hamm involved several defendants who cooperated in the investigation and prosecution of a large drug smuggling conspiracy after they were arrested and charged. Their cooperation was highly productive, and came at great risk to their own well-being. The defendants had pleaded guilty, and their sentencing was postponed pending completion of their cooperation. While the cooperation was underway, taking in to consideration all they had done and risked, the prosecutor made deals with each of the defendants about the length of sentences they would receive. The prosecutor represented to the defendants that the judge had been informed and agreed to the sentences — but that was not the case. The judge was unaware of the agreements.

When the defendants appeared for sentencing the judge announced that he was unaware of the agreements and did not consider himself to be bound by them. He then proceeded to sentence the defendants to much longer terms that were expected. In response the government moved to dismiss the cases — AFTER SENTENCING — based on the fact that the cooperation had been so productive, so longstanding, and at great personal risk to the defendants well being. The trial judge denied the motion, and set forth the reasons for his disagreement with the justification made by the prosecutor in moving to dismiss.

The en banc Fifth Circuit Court reversed the convictions and ordered the trial court to dismiss the charges — granting the Rule 48(a) motion. Among the comments made by the Fifth Circuit were the following:

The [Supreme] Court [in Rinaldi] noted that the principal object of the leave of court requirement was apparently to protect a defendant from prosecutorial harassment. The Court did not decide whether a trial court has discretion to deny a prosecutor’s motion to dismiss which has the consent of the defendant… The Court did not reach that question in Rinaldi, however, since even if it assumed that the trial court could deny the prosecutor’s motion when it disserved the public interest, the prosecutor’s actions in the case could not be fairly characterized as such a disservice.”

“ … the trial court, in extremely limited circumstances in extraordinary cases, may deny the motion when the prosecutor’s actions clearly indicate a “betrayal of the public interest.”

[T]his [Hamm] is a case in which the Government … decided that it would best serve the public interest to dismiss the indictments against the appellants. Neither this court on appeal nor the trial court may properly reassess the prosecutor’s evaluation of the public interest. As long as it is not apparent that the prosecutor was motivated by considerations clearly contrary to the public interest, his motion must be granted.

Judge Gleeson never addresses this language from the “influential” Hamm decision because this language says Judge Sullivan cannot do what Judge Gleeson is urging him to do — “reassess” the DOJ evaluation of the “public interest” in moving to dismiss the Flynn case.

More to follow.

https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/06/10/the-highly-anticipated-brief-from-judge-gleeson-on-the-flynn-case-mueller-report-redux/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[spurraider21]

So did Gleeson deal with the separation of powers issue?

[TSA]

So did Gleeson deal with the separation of powers issue?

Not concerning “ Heckler, Wayte, or ICC all Supreme Court cases”

[Splits]

:sleep

buys time to repeat Flynn's defacto council

1266325423962697730

she seems impartial

[TSA]

buys time to repeat Flynn's defacto council

1266325423962697730

she seems impartial

As impartial as Gleeson. Swing and a miss Splits :lol

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/kristina_wong/status/1270852952698347520

Nice to see Ratcliffe pick up right where Grenell left off.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol these declassifications aren't helping Q.

[TSA]

So did Gleeson deal with the separation of powers issue?

So when are you going to take on my twitter lawyer de jure? You’ve yet to even step to the plate.

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1270877326977318912

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/kristina_wong/status/1270852952698347520

Nice to see Ratcliffe pick up right where Grenell left off.

https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1271078302871158786

[Spurs Homer]

Just pardon the traitor already


trump knew flynn was only doing what he was ordered to do

all traitors


all trump team knew exactly what russia was doing and they helped russia attack the US.

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/JanJekielek/status/1271109411008851969

[ChumpDumper]

https://twitter.com/JanJekielek/status/1271109411008851969Did they include Flynn's lies? You know, the ones he pleaded guilty to twice under oath?

[spurraider21]

So when are you going to take on my twitter lawyer de jure? You’ve yet to even step to the plate.

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1270877326977318912
i have a day job :lol

the amount of free time it takes to post and comment here is minimal, the times its going to take to read through a legal analysis and give a point by point response like i did last time is going to be quite different, and i dont always have that kind of free time. sometimes tho... especially with most CA courts being closed

[TSA]

i have a day job :lol

the amount of free time it takes to post and comment here is minimal, the times its going to take to read through a legal analysis and give a point by point response like i did last time is going to be quite different, and i dont always have that kind of free time. sometimes tho... especially with most CA courts being closed

I'm patient.

[spurraider21]

I'm patient.
then wait until tomorrow's argument on the writ.

[TSA]

Senate Judiciary gives Graham sweeping subpoena powers in review of Russia probe

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 12-10 along party lines Thursday to allow its chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), to subpoena former Obama administration officials as part of the GOP-led probe into the origins of the 2016 Russia investigation.

Why it matters: Graham now has sweeping authority to subpoena documents and more than 50 individuals related to the Russia investigation, including former FBI director James Comey, former CIA director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The Senate Homeland Security Committee, which is also investigating the FBI's probe into the Trump campaign and transition officials, approved similar subpoena powers for its chair, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), last week.

https://www.axios.com/senate-judiciary-subpoena-russia-investigation-65085cd6-8787-4b35-92f1-c5b6e7272c76.html?

[ChumpDumper]

Senate Judiciary gives Graham sweeping subpoena powers in review of Russia probe

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 12-10 along party lines Thursday to allow its chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), to subpoena former Obama administration officials as part of the GOP-led probe into the origins of the 2016 Russia investigation.

Why it matters: Graham now has sweeping authority to subpoena documents and more than 50 individuals related to the Russia investigation, including former FBI director James Comey, former CIA director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The Senate Homeland Security Committee, which is also investigating the FBI's probe into the Trump campaign and transition officials, approved similar subpoena powers for its chair, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), last week.

https://www.axios.com/senate-judiciary-subpoena-russia-investigation-65085cd6-8787-4b35-92f1-c5b6e7272c76.html?So basically all the positions they voted against issuing subpoenas to during the impeachment trial.:lol

[Spurs Homer]

Senate Judiciary gives Graham sweeping subpoena powers in review of Russia probe

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 12-10 along party lines Thursday to allow its chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), to subpoena former Obama administration officials as part of the GOP-led probe into the origins of the 2016 Russia investigation.

Why it matters: Graham now has sweeping authority to subpoena documents and more than 50 individuals related to the Russia investigation, including former FBI director James Comey, former CIA director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The Senate Homeland Security Committee, which is also investigating the FBI's probe into the Trump campaign and transition officials, approved similar subpoena powers for its chair, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), last week.

https://www.axios.com/senate-judiciary-subpoena-russia-investigation-65085cd6-8787-4b35-92f1-c5b6e7272c76.html?


Not even Leningrad Lindsey and the rest of the GOP (Govt of Putin)

REALLY have their heart in this- its just WHITE HOUSE orders to distract before the election since trump already chose team Russia


so go ahead and subpoena ALL of them


EVERY LAST ONE


you wont like what you hear



the TRUTH: Patriots in the Obama administration did their job and protected the country from the traitors on trump team.


No amount of clutching of pearls by republicans will really change the truth and any of those career pros never have feared the “investigate the investigator” traitors


they all know exactly what the republicans are doing- no different that OJ Simpson looking for the “killers”


lolololol

[lefty]

2027 pages :lmao

[TSA]

then wait until tomorrow's argument on the writ.

Batter up

https://mobile.twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1271141440857370624

[ElNono]

The problem with the contention that Ammidown is not good because it's "dicta" overlooks that Fokker, which is what the government relies on, is also "dicta".

This is why the case is generally interesting.

I would also disagree that opponents to the writ are "anti-Flynn"... I don't think this is about Flynn, it's about how our justice system works in a case where there's alleged corruption from the Executive (be it the FBI, the DOJ or both).

[spurraider21]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a15exlPAA3U

[boutons_deux]

Mueller Report redactions of Trump-Roger Stone conversations may soon be lifted


https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/mueller-report-redactions-of-trump-roger-stone-conversations-may-soon-be-lifted/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4766

[Spurs Homer]

Mueller Report redactions of Trump-Roger Stone conversations may soon be lifted


https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/mueller-report-redactions-of-trump-roger-stone-conversations-may-soon-be-lifted/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4766


Barr will intervene or spin it.

[TSA]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a15exlPAA3U

https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1271549605688172544

[ElNono]

https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1271549605688172544

Skimmed through it. Reads like damage control to me. We'll see what the court decides.

[spurraider21]

im still not through the hearing, have only heard Flynn and DOJ lawyers time to this point, but all the articles/tweets about people complaining about judge wilkins bringing up race is completely unfounded. it was the DOJ lawyer that brought up circumstances where 48a motion to dismiss can be denied, if there is an unconstitutional reason such as a civil rights violation. HE brought up that example, and wilkins prodded into it

i still get the sense from the judges that they generally think this is premature, though it does sound like an outright denial of the motion would face a lot of scrutiny

[boutons_deux]

Comrade Don The Con Trash, lame duck flapping hard, knows he's gotta suck Pootin harder for that Trash Moscow Hotel

US to slash the number of American troops in Germany, Trump says

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/us-to-slash-the-number-of-american-troops-in-germany-trump-says/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29 (https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/us-to-slash-the-number-of-american-troops-in-germany-trump-says/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/SaraCarterDC/status/1273288426255679489?s=19

[ChumpDumper]

https://twitter.com/SaraCarterDC/status/1273288426255679489?s=19Did it stun you?

[Spurs Homer]

Lol psycho sara carter

[spurraider21]

Did it stun you?
more stunning than Flynn's shades in that pic?

[ElNono]

oh noes, she filed a motion(!).. it was scathing!

[Spurs Homer]

yep

barr covered up the collusion


https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/19/politics/mueller-report-rerelease-fewer-redactions/index.html

[spurraider21]

oh noes, she filed a motion(!).. it was scathing!
Dick slap!

[ElNono]

Damn, looks like Barr is in damage control mode, now trying to cleanup the SDNY before they can dig into Dear Leader's finances.

Like I said earlier, Barr better hope they win in November, or he gonna have a lot of explaining to do, once the corruption he's trying to hide bubbles up.

[boutons_deux]

Damn, looks like Barr is in damage control mode, now trying to cleanup the SDNY before they can dig into Dear Leader's finances.

Like I said earlier, Barr better hope they win in November, or he gonna have a lot of explaining to do, once the corruption he's trying to hide bubbles up.

I'd love to see Biden and his AG fire Barr's SDNY guy and rehire the guy Barr fired.

I love see Barr's purging SDNY as proof that Barr knows Trash is roadkill.

[Spurs Homer]

I'd love to see Biden and his AG fire Barr's SDNY guy and rehire the guy Barr fired.

I love see Barr's purging SDNY as proof that Barr knows Trash is roadkill.

this is all part of the same plan

putin still giving The orders

wash away the russia/trump election theft, get rid of all intel and fbi patriots,

now

get rid of trumps investigators of his personal/family crimes


berman not gonna make it easy- good for him


on a friday night - barr thought he could go unnoticed but berman is at least calling attention to it


berman is incharge of several trump investigations and must remain or barr will destroy the records/evidence

[Spurs Homer]

Barr just said trump fired berman

trump just denied “having anything to do with it”


berman should FORCE trump to publicly declare that he fired berman

or

berman should continue to refuse until trump has to publicly admit that he is interfering personally with investigations into himself and his shit family

[Spurs Homer]

Berman at least got barr and trump exposed as idiots

and got his assistant named as his successor (for now anyway)

investigations to continue for now

so barr and trumps corrupt obstruction of justice FAILED!

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1275482548315934720

https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1275495480437420040

[ChumpDumper]

expl:lolsive

[Spurs Homer]

expl:lolsive


zelinsky statement just released

13 pages of shitting in barr and TSA’s mouth!

[boutons_deux]

Trash/Barr are like tinpot dictatorship, politically intervening, intimidating a criminal process.

7 more months of this autocratic shit, and it will be backloaded with Trash pulling all kinds of shit, and pardoning his criminal friends, after 3 Nov

[Spurs Homer]

Zelinsky also connected dots in how stone and corsi were conspiring with assange and stone threw congress off by pointing to credico

and away from corsi

and the idiot dems didnt subpoena the corsi/stone emails/texts that connected them

tsa will hide like a little bitch after his defense of stone

tomorrows hearing should be interesting

[DarrinS]

1275794907408535556

[spurraider21]

Wow. Didn’t see that coming tbh

stunned that a writ would be granted when there wasn’t even a lower court ruling yet. Just seems very wonky procedurally. Will have to read the opinion to see how they explained away the availability remedy of simply appealing after Sullivan made a ruling on the motion and why it was necessary to grant writ now

[Spurs Homer]

GOP traitors trying to derail the ongoing hearing (on CSPAN-1 right now)

by banging on desk (gomert)
interuppting witnesses testifying and exposing barrs corruption


disgusting


why are they always against the truth coming out?

[ChumpDumper]

TOTAL EXONERATION

[spurraider21]

So they justified it by saying there was irreparable harm. Not to Flynn though, but to the Executive Branch, because evidently being asked to explain their deliberations leading to the motion to dismiss is apparently irreparable harm to them. Interesting.

[ChumpDumper]

So they justified it by saying there was irreparable harm. Not to Flynn though, but to the Executive Branch, because evidently being asked to explain their deliberations leading to the motion to dismiss is apparently irreparable harm to them. Interesting.Wow. I just thought Flynn's losing his fifth amendment rights in a pardon was the worst case scenario.

[pgardn]

If this gets appealed again, and goes past Donald's reign as king ...

A chance for no pardon?
Would be nice.

[DMC]

Let me know if he spends a day in jail. I mean he's in big trouble we know.

[spurraider21]

Let me know if he spends a day in jail. I mean he's in big trouble we know.
prosecutors werent even recommending jail time in the most recent sentencing memo

[spurraider21]

If this gets appealed again, and goes past Donald's reign as king ...

A chance for no pardon?
Would be nice.
it wont get appealed again.

[spurraider21]

.

[spurraider21]

TOTAL EXONERATION
technically he should never have to be exonerated. presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. then again he pled guilty twice, so... :lol

[ChumpDumper]

technically he should never have to be exonerated. presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. then again he pled guilty twice, so... :lolThat's the best part. Either way he lied and no one can say he's not a lying liar who lies. :lol at he backflips people here did to beatify him while trying to ignore that simple fact.

[DMX7]

That's the best part. Either way he lied and no one can say he's not a lying liar who lies. :lol at he backflips people here did to beatify him while trying to ignore that simple fact.

Yeah, I don't get it. So he either lied about what he was accused of lying about or he lied about his admission that he was guilty of lying? Goodness gracious...

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, I don't get it. So he either lied about what he was accused of lying about or he lied about his admission that he was guilty of lying? Goodness gracious...It looks like he has all kinds of legal exposure now from which his plea agreement protected him but I guess the DoJ isn't going to do anything about that either.

[DMX7]

It looks like he has all kinds of legal exposure now from which his plea agreement protected him but I guess the DoJ isn't going to do anything about that either.

What about if Biden is elected and there is a new AG?

[ChumpDumper]

What about if Biden is elected and there is a new AG?Maybe. The sheer volume of shady shit he was involved in makes me glad he's just out of any position of influence...for now....

Just another white guy who lost his mind because of Black President.

[spurraider21]

What about if Biden is elected and there is a new AG?
i doubt they'd do anything. same reason trump's DOJ never went after hillary. started off a new regime by going after political rivals is not a good look

[ElNono]

Full decision:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-e6bc-dfa8-abfb-efff27b20001

[DarrinS]

1275829742558679040


In his defence, he probably doesn't remember. :lol

[spurraider21]

1275831427234508802

[ChumpDumper]

Good for Joe. He should take full credit for anything that helped get Flynn out of government.

[DarrinS]

i doubt they'd do anything. same reason trump's DOJ never went after hillary. started off a new regime by going after political rivals is not a good look

It's also not a good look for outgoing regimes.

[TSA]

https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1275482548315934720

https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1275495480437420040

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1275803339738021890

[TSA]

djohn2oo8 where you at big homie :lmao

[ElNono]

So they justified it by saying there was irreparable harm. Not to Flynn though, but to the Executive Branch, because evidently being asked to explain their deliberations leading to the motion to dismiss is apparently irreparable harm to them. Interesting.

What's perhaps concerning is not this particular case itself, but setting a precedent for dismissals on shaky grounds. If the judiciary can't check potential prosecutorial corruption, nobody else realistically can.

Also, interesting on the dissent that this result might cause a district court split, in which case this might be something the SCOTUS needs to address at some point.

[spurraider21]

What's perhaps concerning is not this particular case itself, but setting a precedent for dismissals on shaky grounds. If the judiciary can't check potential prosecutorial corruption, nobody else realistically can.

Also, interesting on the dissent that this result might cause a district court split, in which case this might be something the SCOTUS needs to address at some point.
i dont know that it is the judiciary's role to check against that type of corruption, though, even if it would have been "convenient" here

[Chris]

TSA we have victory! :lol

[TSA]

TSA we have victory! :lol

:lol there’s bump material for years in this thread

[boutons_deux]

If the judiciary can't check potential prosecutorial corruption



judiciary has been deeply corrupted by Trash/Bar/Leo by putting extreme righting ideologues like Rao on the Federal benches

Who's gonna check on judicial corruption?

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1275811428826521610

This thread is far from being finished. Now that Flynn’s cleared his case no longer stands in the way of any other investigations. The party is now starting.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Get ready for six months of TSA nothingburgers.

[boutons_deux]

stands in the way of any other investigations

Barr will shutdown / block all investigations, and block everybody he can from testifying in the House.

[TSA]

Barr will shutdown / block all investigations, and block everybody he can from testifying in the House.

Barr appointed the USAO’s investigating, he’s not going to block them.

[ElNono]

i dont know that it is the judiciary's role to check against that type of corruption, though, even if it would have been "convenient" here

Who would, though? Congress through impeachment?

[spurraider21]

Who would, though? Congress through impeachment?
that's one. could also argue elections if you think the executive is corrupt. dont see where the constitution grants that sort of power to the courts

[boutons_deux]

Barr will certainly not demand en banc review.

[TSA]

830101089668235264

MIA OP of the longest paged nothingburger thread in the history of Spurstalk :lmao

[ChumpDumper]

:lol TSA still not accepting the simple truth of the OP

[DMX7]

i doubt they'd do anything. same reason trump's DOJ never went after hillary. started off a new regime by going after political rivals is not a good look

It's not a good look but it's too bad to simply ignore.

[pgardn]

TSA (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=7640) we have victory! :lol


https://mobile.twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1275811428826521610

This thread is far from being finished. Now that Flynn’s cleared his case no longer stands in the way of any other investigations. The party is now starting.

Its almost like Trump getting cleared by a Republican Majority.
You can vote it out, but the scar is obvious. He is a criminal. He did not even tell the president he had worked for a foreign government.
He plead guilty once, twice, because they with held food and water...
Stone has already admitted he is a liar and criminal for the good guys.

[pgardn]

It's not a good look but it's too bad to simply ignore.

Its coming back in 2020. A reminder will emerge. I just hope its not the wrong type of reminder

[TSA]

https://mobile.twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1275896376560214016

https://mobile.twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1275902838682587142

[ElNono]

"appears" and "is" are not synonymous...

[ChumpDumper]

EXPLOSIVE BOMBSHELLS

[Chris]

Trump's scarlett letter blah blah blah.

I'm so sorry this is happening to you.

[Chris]

MY TAKES ARE EXPLOSIVE DIARRHEA

[ChumpDumper]

:lol even when Chris wins he acts like a loser

[Spurtacular]

MY TAKES ARE EXPLOSIVE DIARRHEA

[Spurtacular]

"appears" and "is" are not synonymous...

Nice philo.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol derp mad too

[pgardn]

I'm so sorry this is happening to you.

Its happening to you as well.
Wait when the other team feels obliged to play the same game.
You will have your medicine and like it then.

[DarrinS]

Its happening to you as well.
Wait when the other team feels obliged to play the same game.
You will have your medicine and like it then.

What team did the wrong thing in this case?

[spurraider21]

What team did the wrong thing in this case?
flynn's charges were brought by the office of the special counsel, supposed to be functioning somewhat independently from the larger DOJ

he pled guilty. when some issues were raised with supposedly exonerating evidence, judge specifically asked him if he wanted to talk to his lawyers and consider withdrawing his guilty plea. he instead affirmed that he was guilty

with sentencing pending (and a recommendation for no prison time), DOJ's new AG appoints a US attorney, Jeff Jensen to review Flynn's prosecution (again, begs the question of whether special counsel is actually functioning independently)

prosecution completely shifts intentions and no longer wants to pursue anything even though he's already pled guilty and all that was left was going to be sentencing with no prison time recommended

newly appointed US Attorney, Timothy Shea (January 2020) was the only attorney who signed the motion to dismiss. he had just replaced Jessie Liu in that role because she was nominated for a different role under the Treasury Department. her nomination was pulled 2 days before confirmation hearings after trump was presented with a memo outlining her lack of loyalty to him

imo its effectively a pardon but done in a way to look like they were really addressing corruption instead of just helping a friend out... recall that trump even asked comey to let the Flynn thing go way back when this started

[Chris]

Flynn took the guilty plea because Mueller and his team of Obama prosecutors were threatening his family. 21 likes to forget that part.

[spurraider21]

Flynn took the guilty plea because Mueller and his team of Obama prosecutors were threatening his family. 21 likes to forget that part.
:lol threatening his family

his son was the subject of an investigation. is it wrongful for them to consider charging people who are believed to have committed a crime?

[TSA]

flynn's charges were brought by the office of the special counsel, supposed to be functioning somewhat independently from the larger DOJ

he pled guilty. when some issues were raised with supposedly exonerating evidence, judge specifically asked him if he wanted to talk to his lawyers and consider withdrawing his guilty plea. he instead affirmed that he was guilty

with sentencing pending (and a recommendation for no prison time), DOJ's new AG appoints a US attorney, Jeff Jensen to review Flynn's prosecution (again, begs the question of whether special counsel is actually functioning independently)
















prosecution completely shifts intentions and no longer wants to pursue anything even though he's already pled guilty and all that was left was going to be sentencing with no prison time recommended

newly appointed US Attorney, Timothy Shea (January 2020) was the only attorney who signed the motion to dismiss. he had just replaced Jessie Liu in that role because she was nominated for a different role under the Treasury Department. her nomination was pulled 2 days before confirmation hearings after trump was presented with a memo outlining her lack of loyalty to him

imo its effectively a pardon but done in a way to look like they were really addressing corruption instead of just helping a friend out... recall that trump even asked comey to let the Flynn thing go way back when this started

:lol dude I thought you were a straight shooter. There’s no way you leave out what Jensen uncovered that triggered DOJ action unless you are being a disingenuous piece of shit.

[DMC]

flynn's charges were brought by the office of the special counsel, supposed to be functioning somewhat independently from the larger DOJ

he pled guilty. when some issues were raised with supposedly exonerating evidence, judge specifically asked him if he wanted to talk to his lawyers and consider withdrawing his guilty plea. he instead affirmed that he was guilty

with sentencing pending (and a recommendation for no prison time), DOJ's new AG appoints a US attorney, Jeff Jensen to review Flynn's prosecution (again, begs the question of whether special counsel is actually functioning independently)

prosecution completely shifts intentions and no longer wants to pursue anything even though he's already pled guilty and all that was left was going to be sentencing with no prison time recommended

newly appointed US Attorney, Timothy Shea (January 2020) was the only attorney who signed the motion to dismiss. he had just replaced Jessie Liu in that role because she was nominated for a different role under the Treasury Department. her nomination was pulled 2 days before confirmation hearings after trump was presented with a memo outlining her lack of loyalty to him

imo its effectively a pardon but done in a way to look like they were really addressing corruption instead of just helping a friend out... recall that trump even asked comey to let the Flynn thing go way back when this started

:lol

Technically the Spurs won in 2013, it's effectively a championship. What's 5 fucking minutes?

[DMC]

:lol threatening his family

his son was the subject of an investigation. is it wrongful for them to consider charging people who are believed to have committed a crime?

Say this to a black person.

Doh!

[ElNono]

flynn's charges were brought by the office of the special counsel, supposed to be functioning somewhat independently from the larger DOJ

he pled guilty. when some issues were raised with supposedly exonerating evidence, judge specifically asked him if he wanted to talk to his lawyers and consider withdrawing his guilty plea. he instead affirmed that he was guilty

with sentencing pending (and a recommendation for no prison time), DOJ's new AG appoints a US attorney, Jeff Jensen to review Flynn's prosecution (again, begs the question of whether special counsel is actually functioning independently)

prosecution completely shifts intentions and no longer wants to pursue anything even though he's already pled guilty and all that was left was going to be sentencing with no prison time recommended

newly appointed US Attorney, Timothy Shea (January 2020) was the only attorney who signed the motion to dismiss. he had just replaced Jessie Liu in that role because she was nominated for a different role under the Treasury Department. her nomination was pulled 2 days before confirmation hearings after trump was presented with a memo outlining her lack of loyalty to him

imo its effectively a pardon but done in a way to look like they were really addressing corruption instead of just helping a friend out... recall that trump even asked comey to let the Flynn thing go way back when this started

Yup, and Barr tried to distance himself from this by appointing an alleged 'impartial' third party, but that in itself is an extraordinary move, undermining his own prosecutors and investigators. Ultimately, it was his DOJ that filed the motion, so if anybody ever has to answer for this, it will be him.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Trump supporters still can't see how unbelievably fucked up all this is to protect the worst National Security Adviser in American history.

[Spurtacular]

Flynn took the guilty plea because Mueller and his team of Obama prosecutors were threatening his family. 21 likes to forget that part.

Even the mafia doesn't threaten family members of enemies.

[spurraider21]

:lol dude I thought you were a straight shooter. There’s no way you leave out what Jensen uncovered that triggered DOJ action unless you are being a disingenuous piece of shit.
None of what he uncovered changed the fact that Flynn lied to investigators which is the basis of the charges

[TSA]

None of what he uncovered changed the fact that Flynn lied to investigators which is the basis of the charges

And the charges were based on an interview that was conducted for an investigation that was no longer justifiably predicated. Nothing that Flynn said was material. Why did you go straight to the prosecution shifting intentions and not wanting to pursue without explaining why and how that happened? Then you try and make Timothy Shea being the only one to sign the motion to dismiss as some big deal while leaving out that Jocelyn Ballantine, one of the lead attorneys prosecuting Flynn, signed and submitted a petition for a Writ of Mandamus in support of Flynn. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-71b5-d268-a7ff-73fd963a0000. And lol at "tryin to make it look like they were addressing corruption" when they clearly addressed corruption and exposed Van Grack lying to the court and hiding exculpatory evidence for years. It's pretty pathetic watching you try and build this narrative while purposely omitting well known facts.

[RandomGuy]

And the charges were based on an interview that was conducted for an investigation that was no longer justifiably predicated. Nothing that Flynn said was material. Why did you go straight to the prosecution shifting intentions and not wanting to pursue without explaining why and how that happened? Then you try and make Timothy Shea being the only one to sign the motion to dismiss as some big deal while leaving out that Jocelyn Ballantine, one of the lead attorneys prosecuting Flynn, signed and submitted a petition for a Writ of Mandamus in support of Flynn. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-71b5-d268-a7ff-73fd963a0000. And lol at "tryin to make it look like they were addressing corruption" when they clearly addressed corruption and exposed Van Grack lying to the court and hiding exculpatory evidence for years. It's pretty pathetic watching you try and build this narrative while purposely omitting well known facts.

“Yes,” he says with a youth pastor’s grin. “Like Scripture.” Every tweet, every misspelling, every typo, every strange capitalization—especially the capitalizations, says Dave—has meaning. “The truth is right there in what the media think are his mistakes. He doesn’t make mistakes.” The message of the shirt to Dave is: Study the layers. “Trump is known as a five-dimension chess player,” Dave says later. And he’s sending us clues. About the Democrats and Ukraine and his plans. “There are major operations going on,” Dave tells me months later, suggesting that Trump is using COVID-19 field hospitals as “a cover” to rescue children from sex trafficking

[spurraider21]

And the charges were based on an interview that was conducted for an investigation that was no longer justifiably predicated. Nothing that Flynn said was material. Why did you go straight to the prosecution shifting intentions and not wanting to pursue without explaining why and how that happened? Then you try and make Timothy Shea being the only one to sign the motion to dismiss as some big deal while leaving out that Jocelyn Ballantine, one of the lead attorneys prosecuting Flynn, signed and submitted a petition for a Writ of Mandamus in support of Flynn. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000172-71b5-d268-a7ff-73fd963a0000. And lol at "tryin to make it look like they were addressing corruption" when they clearly addressed corruption and exposed Van Grack lying to the court and hiding exculpatory evidence for years. It's pretty pathetic watching you try and build this narrative while purposely omitting well known facts.
i dont think those omitted facts are material to whether or not a crime was committed or whether or not his guilty plea is more or less valid

the attorneys on the case who were in favor of continuing with sentencing were removed and a new attorney on the case decides to dismiss the case.

[DMC]

Philo trying to interpret illegal decision to fit his narrative. Amazing. Fucking lawyers, right?

[spurraider21]

Philo trying to interpret illegal decision to fit his narrative. Amazing. Fucking lawyers, right?
what illegal decision? are you referring to Flynn's decision to lie to investigators?

[TSA]

i dont think those omitted facts are material to whether or not a crime was committed or whether or not his guilty plea is more or less valid

the attorneys on the case who were in favor of continuing with sentencing were removed and a new attorney on the case decides to dismiss the case.Of course the facts you omitted are material and they were the basis for the government moving to dismiss.

Explain how a crime can be committed during an interview for an investigation that was no longer justifiably predicated.

Jocelyn Ballantine was never removed and actually signed the petition supporting the case be dropped.

Do you omit all of this stuff purposely?

[ElNono]

Of course the facts you omitted are material and they were the basis for the government moving to dismiss.

Explain how a crime can be committed during an interview for an investigation that was no longer justifiably predicated.

Jocelyn Ballantine was never removed and actually signed the petition supporting the case be dropped.

Do you omit all of this stuff purposely?

It's really not complicated, the DOJ always had access to the same evidence and concluded it was material not 6 months ago. This evidence might be 'new' to the judge and/or defense, but it wasn't to the DOJ.

There was clearly a convenient change of opinion/hearth at the DOJ here, nothing else. It's undeniably weird considering this case was already won.