• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michael Flynn moves to withdraw guilty plea, citing 'bad faith' by government

SLC said:
Michael Flynn moves to withdraw guilty plea, citing '''bad faith''' by government | Fox News


Former national security adviser Michael Flynn moved Tuesday to withdraw his guilty plea for lying to the FBI in the Russia probe, citing "bad faith" by the government.

The court filing came just days after the Justice Department reversed course to recommend up to six months of prison time in his case, alleging he was not fully cooperating or accepting responsibility for his actions.

But, in Tuesday’s court filing, his legal team said he moved to withdraw his plea "because of the government's bad faith, vindictiveness and breach of the plea agreement."

"The prosecution has shown abject bad faith in pure retaliation against Mr. Flynn since he retained new counsel," Flynn’s attorneys wrote in the filing. "This can only be because with new, unconflicted counsel, Mr. Flynn refused to lie for the prosecution."

The filing continued:"Justice is not a game, and there should be no room for such gamesmanship in the Department of Justice."

In the court filing, Flynn's lawyers said the Justice Department is attempting to "rewrite history" by withdrawing its recommendation that he be sentenced to probation and by suggesting he had not been forthcoming or cooperative.

===============================================================

I hope Flynn wins. The state's case is very thin.
Click to expand...

”Bad Faith” by the government has now been replaced with “obvious criminality”.

Trump should hire him to clean house... as he was going to do when hired. Which obviously scared the **** out of the Obama administration cronies.
###


Hatuey said:
The guy who got fired for lying is mad that people still believe he is lying. Spends more money to prove he's not lying when other people don't want to work with him m.

Shocking revelation.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
Click to expand...

RAMOSS said:
Considering his bad faith, I suspect it is unlikely that the judge will accept his withdrawal.
Click to expand...

Winston said:
It's a shame that James Comey didn't just let him go like Trump told him to. A shame indeed.

so many lives ruined!
Click to expand...

Atomic Kid said:
He's toast. Hope they tack on a couple more months when he's sentenced.
Click to expand...

Leftists... the boomerang is coming for the scalps of your criminal party and it’s deep state actors.

:)
 
prometeus said:
Yea, because the lying scumbag like all other scumbags Trump surrounds himself with are innocent and pure like driven snow.
Click to expand...

The “scum” is Obama ordained Deep State Scum.

641FB76D-FDBD-4162-A746-D79FA4E85BBB.jpg

The boomerang has arrived... now to watch the bloodletting.

Helter Skelter Mother****ers.

:2usflag:

 
Last edited:
Dutch Uncle said:
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems it might be easier for Trump to pardon him if he claims innocence.
Click to expand...

Trump best hurry. No pardon power after Jan 2021.
 
prometeus said:
Took you this long to come up with this crap?
Click to expand...

You left out the supporting evidence.

View attachment 67279360

You would have been a wonderful member of Obama’s FBI... fortunately for you, you weren’t, and will be spared being part of the Team Obama Orange Jumpsuit Brigade.

But... your deceitful ways have been noted for public record nonetheless.
 
zimmer said:
”Bad Faith” by the government has now been replaced with “obvious criminality”.

Trump should hire him to clean house... as he was going to do when hired. Which obviously scared the **** out of the Obama administration cronies.
###










Leftists... the boomerang is coming for the scalps of your criminal party and it’s deep state actors.

:)
Click to expand...

LOL! And the guys in the white coats will soon be coming for you.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
LOL. If Trump loses the election, would anyone be surprised if he opens the doors of all the Federal prisons?
Click to expand...

I would be. Will I be surprised exaggerated questions such as this? Nope.
 
zimmer said:
”Bad Faith” by the government has now been replaced with “obvious criminality”.

Trump should hire him to clean house... as he was going to do when hired. Which obviously scared the **** out of the Obama administration cronies.
###










Leftists... the boomerang is coming for the scalps of your criminal party and it’s deep state actors.

:)
Click to expand...

Let's see if Durham can find the original 302. ;)
 
zimmer said:
”Bad Faith” by the government has now been replaced with “obvious criminality”.

Trump should hire him to clean house... as he was going to do when hired. Which obviously scared the **** out of the Obama administration cronies.
###










Leftists... the boomerang is coming for the scalps of your criminal party and it’s deep state actors.

:)
Click to expand...

If justice is done, yes. I rather suspect that DC is so broken, the politicized Deep State so deeply entrenched, that justice simply isn't going to happen.

Observe Christopher Wray's continued covering this up, thwarting the process and progress of justice.

A fair question is why is Wray still in his position?

Barr is his boss. Why doesn't Barr simply instruct Wray, his subordinate, to come clean and produce the documents legally and legitimately requested by Congressional Oversight?

I suspect this is an example of how deeply entrenched and politicized the Deep State is. Wray must believe that he's going to get away with it.

Unbelievable that some continue to make politically motivated excuses for the FBI's behavior in this case. If the Deep State FBI can violate a Senior administration offical's rights like this, what makes anyone think that such an FBI steamroller would be even slowed down by regular people's rights? Why isn't the ACLU all over this?
 
Last edited:
Atomic Kid said:
LOL! And the guys in the white coats will soon be coming for you.
Click to expand...

Somehow I have difficulty with a judge agreeing to vacate a guilty plea based on

"Yes, Your Honour, I lied when I said I knew what I was doing by pleading guilty. And, yes, Your honour, I lied when I said that I was pleading guilty of my own free will. And, yes, Your Honour, I lied when I said that I was not being coerced by anyone to plead guilty. And, yes, Your Honour, I lied when I said that I had - in fact - done the things that I was on trial for doing. And, yes, Your Honour, there isn't anything that is new about the situation. But I'm telling the truth now and want to go through with the whole circus now even though the facts haven't changed one little bit and I know that my previous admissions can be used as evidence against me when I claim that I didn't know what I was doing by pleading guilty, and when I claim that I was not pleading guilty of my own free will, and when I claim that I was being coerced, and when I claim that I had not done the things that I was on trial for, and when I claim that there is a whole bunch of things that are new about the situation."
​

bUT, in American courts the Judges have abandoned the inherent right of the courts to say "Tell me, Sir, do you actually expect any rational and intelligent person to believe that crap.", so it is possible.
 
how many crooks and con men can Trump Republicans back in one 4 year period?
 
eohrnberger said:
...

Barr is his boss. Why doesn't Barr simply instruct Wray, his subordinate, to come clean and produce the documents legally and legitimately requested by Congressional Oversight?

...
Click to expand...

Possibly because

  1. Setting the precedent that the government MUST produce documents legally requested by "Congressional Oversight" would be rather dangerous for Mr. Trump.
    *
    and
    *
  2. Setting the precedent that "Congressional Oversight" has the right to determine for itself what is "legitimate" would be rather dangerous for Mr. Trump.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Possibly because

  1. Setting the precedent that the government MUST produce documents legally requested by "Congressional Oversight" would be rather dangerous for Mr. Trump.
    *
    and
    *
  2. Setting the precedent that "Congressional Oversight" has the right to determine for itself what is "legitimate" would be rather dangerous for Mr. Trump.
Click to expand...

Your opinion noted. Not sure that I would prescribe to that opinion, though.

Sure, Trump says things in-artfully and off the wall, quite often in fact.
Sure, he gets into pointless and stupid Twitter slap fights that in the end do him more harm than good.

But more often than not, in the end, it seems that what he says ends up being far closer to the truth than whatever any other politician says about it (the political activists in the media, and the ones that call themselves 'news' and 'journalists', doubly so)

So, :shrug: Kinda is what it is.
 
eohrnberger said:
Your opinion noted. Not sure that I would prescribe to that opinion, though.
Click to expand...

I provided OPTIONS and not opinions.

eohrnberger said:
Sure, Trump says things in-artfully and off the wall, quite often in fact.
Sure, he gets into pointless and stupid Twitter slap fights that in the end do him more harm than good.
Click to expand...

I'm with you so far.

eohrnberger said:
But more often than not, in the end, it seems that what he says ends up being far closer to the truth than whatever any other politician says about it (the political activists in the media, and the ones that call themselves 'news' and 'journalists', doubly so)
Click to expand...

That may be how it SEEMS to YOU. Others take looks at actual facts and compare them with "Trumpfacts".

eohrnberger said:
So, :shrug: Kinda is what it is.
Click to expand...

Indeed, "Kinda is what it is" to you.
 
eohrnberger said:
If justice is done, yes. I rather suspect that DC is so broken, the politicized Deep State so deeply entrenched, that justice simply isn't going to happen.

Observe Christopher Wray's continued covering this up, thwarting the process and progress of justice.

A fair question is why is Wray still in his position?

Barr is his boss. Why doesn't Barr simply instruct Wray, his subordinate, to come clean and produce the documents legally and legitimately requested by Congressional Oversight?

I suspect this is an example of how deeply entrenched and politicized the Deep State is. Wray must believe that he's going to get away with it.

Unbelievable that some continue to make politically motivated excuses for the FBI's behavior in this case. If the Deep State FBI can violate a Senior administration offical's rights like this, what makes anyone think that such an FBI steamroller would be even slowed down by regular people's rights? Why isn't the ACLU all over this?
Click to expand...
Help may be on the way. There are still some honest and decent people in DC, though none with a (D) behind their name. DNI Grenell Will Release Declassified Russia Probe Transcripts, If Schiff Continues To Block - Sara A. Carter
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
Help may be on the way. There are still some honest and decent people in DC, though none with a (D) behind their name.
Click to expand...

This is certainly the truth and accurate, but that being said, no reason what so ever to take your eye off of anyone with an (R) behind their name.

DNI Grenell Will Release Declassified Russia Probe Transcripts, If Schiff Continues To Block - Sara A. Carter
Click to expand...

Good. Some more of the truth comes out. I'm all for it. Make you really wonder why Piece Of Schiff is so against it as to try and block it.

Just how awful, evil, lying and hyperpartisan is it going to make him look, you have to ask yourself.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
I provided OPTIONS and not opinions.



I'm with you so far.



That may be how it SEEMS to YOU. Others take looks at actual facts and compare them with "Trumpfacts".



Indeed, "Kinda is what it is" to you.
Click to expand...

Clearly we have differing opinions. Fair enough.
 
eohrnberger said:
Clearly we have differing opinions. Fair enough.
Click to expand...

My position is

  1. If A does X and I say that "A did X." that is an "assertion of fact", and I have an obligation to provide some evidence to back it up is so asked;
    *
  2. if A does X and I say that "A doing X means Y." that is an OPINION and I don't have any OBLIGATION to back it up;
    *
    and
    *
  3. if someone asks "Why did A do X?" and I say "Possibly _[fill in the blank]_." that is an OPTION and doesn't even create as big an OBLIGATION as an opinion does.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Now that that portion of the transcripts that "cleared" Mr. Trump are going to be released, when are the rest of the transcripts going to be released?
Click to expand...

they already released them. Trump was clear there was no evidence.
schiff is a liar and a fraud that we knew he was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom