Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[spurraider21]

Judge recuses in Michael Flynn case

President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, will face a different judge to be sentenced than the one who took Flynn’s guilty plea to a felony false statement charge last week, court records show.

Judge Emmet Sullivan was randomly assigned to take over the case after Judge Rudolph Contreras recused himself.

A court spokeswoman confirmed to POLITICO that the reassignment was due to Contreras' recusal, but said the court generally does not disclose the reason that a judge begged off the case.

Sullivan is an appointee of President Bill Clinton, and Contreras was appointed by President Barack Obama.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...tencing-287001
spurraider21 I know you aren't an FISC expert but in your experience is it common for judges to recuse themselves and when they do what are some typical reasons?

No clue about commonality tbh. Especially in a fisc context. Conflict on interest, past dealings, etc are common reasons off top of my head. I externed for a judge who had to disclose an old case he worked on like 30 years ago with defendant company. It was so far removed that the parties agreed to waive it
to

[boutons_deux]

Russian media report confirms cyber attack on US election

Rachel Maddow shares the details of a Russian media report

that explains that the reason Russian intelligence cyber experts were arrested for treason a year ago is

that they were the sources that helped the U.S. figure out who was responsible for the DNC hack.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/russian-media-report-confirms-cyber-attack-on-us-election-1112059972001?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma

Pootin says it wasn't him, and BFF Trash says he had no help.

[Chris]

[djohn2oo8]

lol, djohn

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.a6223ee7e0ac

So you believe the Washington post now? You said they were fake news Darrin. Make up your mind.

[djohn2oo8]

[djohn2oo8]

[Chris]

Here comes the tax 'prepaprer' - big booms & Trump is going down

[dabom]

Boom X6.

[Pavlov]

Chris triggered again.

[dabom]

Here comes the tax 'prepaprer' - big booms & Trump is going down

Learn how to spell got.

[dabom]

I thought the guy that said boom was ya guys.

[djohn2oo8]

Jesus Chris that was terrible spelling.

[Chris]

Learn how to spell got.

Jesus Chris that was terrible spelling.

Dumb & Dumber ^

[dabom]

Chris, we know I'm smarter than you.

That's a fact of life.

[djohn2oo8]

Dumb & Dumber ^

Thinking Steve Bannen is a real account.

[dabom]

Thinking Steve Bannen is a real account.

He doesn't even know the name of who he's batting for.

[TSA]

Did you read the whole article?

Sure did.

[TSA]

Supreme Court justices recused themselves 180 times in most recent term

BY DEBRA CASSENS WEISS
POSTED JULY 12, 2016, 8:30 AM CDT

http://www.abajournal.com/news/artic...t_recent_term/

Thanks.

Now can you find how often FISC judges recuse themselves?

[TSA]

No clue about commonality tbh. Especially in a fisc context. Conflict on interest, past dealings, etc are common reasons off top of my head. I externed for a judge who had to disclose an old case he worked on like 30 years ago with defendant company. It was so far removed that the parties agreed to waive it
to

thanks

[FuzzyLumpkins]

TSA furiously cooking up a conspiracy theory based on wishcasting once more.

[pgardn]

Collusion is in several federal statutes.

If Mueller starts serving indictments to grand juries that do not reduce the charges into the relevant statutes then it's an issue. In regular discourse there is nothing wrong with using the omnibus term.

Which the article was attempting to discuss and point out that this is very important. And why any prosecutor, even one as thorough as Mueller, might be hamstrung.

[TSA]

[pgardn]

Some collusion is a crime. The issue here is that the criminal collusion applicable is difficult to prove. You just fail to understand the distinction.

So this is not true?

There is not a statute that refers to criminal collusion. There is no crime of collusion.”



Where are vy and Spurraider? Is this wrong?

[djohn2oo8]

So this is not true?

There is not a statute that refers to criminal collusion. There is no crime of collusion.”



Where are vy and Spurraider? Is this wrong?

Its conspiracy told you a while ago.

[djohn2oo8]