Page 161 of 188 FirstFirst ... 61111151159160161162163171 ... LastLast
Results 1,601 to 1,610 of 1871

Thread: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outside gr

  1. #1601
    Guru
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,038

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    Quote Originally Posted by W_Heisenberg View Post
    1. Trump was informed that Flynn was a risk.



    2. And the whole point of an investigation into Flynn is to find out if Flynn was a security risk.

    If the FBI already knew Flynn was a security risk there would be no reason to investigate him. There would be no point in doing so. The whole point of an investigation is to find the truth about something.



    I think it's suspicious that Flynn lied to Pence about the nature of his calls with Kislyak. It is suspicious that Flynn told Pence that the calls did not involve a discussion on sanctions, when they did, in fact, involve sanctions. That's strange, especially when Russia is attacking us, trying to interfere in our election, so they can sway the election in Trump's favor, a person they thought would be more likely to be helpful with respect to the sanctions on Russia.
    The nature of his calls with Kislyak? And what was that nature?

    And so what if they did include sanctions or not? That is not the business of the FBI, it is the responsibility of the new administration.

    The US is not under attack by Russia,
    Last edited by Fred C Dobbs II; 05-22-20 at 10:53 PM.

  2. #1602
    Guru
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,038

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    Quote Originally Posted by maxparrish View Post
    I appreciate that you are engaging in denial and wishful thinking about the Force 5 storm looming, but if Sullivan does not get blown out the courtroom doors he will be very fortunate.

    All the signs are there for those who understand how the winds of law are blowing. They are:

    A writ of mandamus is very uncommon, even rare, and most don't have a chance. Most are dismissed outright, but the wording of the order for Sullivan to respond directly to the writ shows the court is deeply troubled.

    And usually, when writ is not dismissed outright, the appellate court (Rule 21 (b)(4)) might invite the trial court judge or an amicus curiae to address the writ for him. It does not have to order the judge to respond. YET, they did.

    And even if the appellate court orders the trial court judge to respond, it could avoid requiring the judge to personally defend the action under challenge by simply appointing a lawyer as amicus curiae to defend the judge's actions. They didn't. They didn't give him that courtesy or option. Why? Because they aren't interested in hearing an Amicus's legal arguments showing why the DOJ's motion should not be granted. Rather, they are interested in hearing directly, from the judge, why the hell he refused to grant the dismissal.

    And, by the way, in Fokker at least they allowed the judge to have an amicus to do it for him.

    Nope, the DC Circuit is thus making Judge Sullivan--a lifetime federal judge--publicly and directly explain his refusal to grant, personally to them in his own written brief. (Adding salt to the wound by also inviting the DOJ to add his own views of Sullivan's actions).

    In short, of all the options available to the DC Circuit for ruling on the writ, the DC Circuit, chose the most extreme, rare, impolite and drastic of them.

    They are pissed off. Sullivan better have a hell of a reason or his going to walk out humiliated.




    Apparently he is on trial - all three are not happy and won't accept your narrative as sufficient. They aren't interested in hearing what he "could do" as judge, they want to know WHY he didn't do what he should have done.

    In short, he's in trouble.
    It is impossible to 'humiliate' people like this. He must have known how it would eventually end when he made his decision and will instead be congratulated for fighting the good fight' when his decision is overturned.

  3. #1603
    Conservatarian

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,869

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred C Dobbs II View Post
    It is impossible to 'humiliate' people like this. He must have known how it would eventually end when he made his decision and will instead be congratulated for fighting the good fight' when his decision is overturned.
    Well, I believe he thought a writ wouldn't be accepted this early...before he has made any ruling on the pending motions.

  4. #1604
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,383

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    Quote Originally Posted by Tangmo View Post
    You've been framing these statements of your own triumph of the will campaign for nearly four years.

    Precious few facts are agreed upon while the old fantasy facts keep getting recycled anew for six months or so then new "facts" are always dropped on the table and which while DoA get pushed for another six months or so of it. Then old and newest "facts" are mixed and bled for another six months or so. Rinse and Repeat.

    The outstanding fact and the salient reality is that Flynn pleaded guilty and that the major project of Putin Trump & Rowers is to nullify the plea so that justice and the rule of law can be demolished by a thousand cuts to the Constitution on many fronts, Flynn being the neverending one -- until it ends in the triumph of the will.

    After all it is clear and unmistakable the Rowers would rather be ruled by Putin's Russia than governed by elected Democrats under the Constitution. Indeed, the worst thing that can happen to the American Armband Right is to be governed by elected Democrats and under the Constitution. Nullifying Flynn's guilty pleas is seen as the strident breakthrough blow to the rule of law and as the Right's greatest success since Trump got elected via the ECV.
    Its certainly true that information being released of late could have been released earlier (the House Intelligence Committee transcripts, the jumbled 302's, the memo from Ms. Rice). The transcript of the phone call should have been released three years ago. Heck, the Mueller grand jury info should be released.
    But it is what is. And when information is released which does not support the previous narrative, its not an assault upon the Constitution or some alliance with Putin that is developing.

  5. #1605
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,383

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    Quote Originally Posted by W_Heisenberg View Post
    You are confusing a lack of evidence sufficient to prove a conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt with a total absence of any and all evidence.

    Those two things are not the same thing.

    I don't know if this is a mistake in you being unable to think logically, or if this is an attempt on your part to confuse people.

    In any case, you are wrong.

    This was the question I asked: "Who among the "Obama" DOJ and DNI have said there was no articulable factual basis to launch Crossfire Hurricane?" This is not something McCabe said in his entire transcript. This is not someone anyone associated with the "Obama" DOJ or DNI ever said at any time. And I challenge you to prove otherwise. I took the time to read Page 207 to 211. And McCabe does not say, "Nobody saw evidence of Trump or his campaign conspiring with Russia."

    Let's read the pertinent responses from McCabe that you referenced:

    https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.ne...20/05/am33.pdf



    These are very specific questions put to McCabe about very specific aspects of the investigation. They, in no way, indicate that McCabe thought there was no evidence Trump or his campaign was conspiring with Russia.

    With respect to this last question, the Special Counsel was able to later connect the dots and prove the Trump's campaign had foreknowledge of when the e-mails would be published publicly.

    To reiterate, my question was: "Who among the "Obama" DOJ and DNI have said there was no articulable factual basis to launch Crossfire Hurricane?"

    And this is not something McCabe said in his entire transcript.
    McCabe was asked whether he saw any evidence, any fact, that would cause to him to believe that Trump was conspiring with Russia.
    All the other witnesses were asked the same question, if he or she had seen such evidence or facts. They answered the same way.
    Conclusion: Nobody in the Obama DOJ and DNI saw evidence and facts that Trump was conspiring with Russia.

  6. #1606
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,383

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outsid

    Quote Originally Posted by W_Heisenberg View Post
    I'm not arguing that Barr doesn't think the FBI erred.

    I am arguing that Barr is wrong about his thoughts about the FBI having erred.

    Barr is wrong when he suggests that the lie was not material.
    Ok-- well Barr disagrees.
    So that ends that.

  7. #1607
    Guru
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,038

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    Quote Originally Posted by maxparrish View Post
    Well, I believe he thought a writ wouldn't be accepted this early...before he has made any ruling on the pending motions.
    I'll guess you're right because you'll likely know the law better than I do.

  8. #1608
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,383

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by W_Heisenberg View Post

    You and others are trying to say that there was not a reasonable basis to conduct an investigation of the Trump campaign, and no therefore no reasonable basis to prosecute Flynn for lying about things related to Crossfire Hurricane. This is FALSE. The FBI had sufficient reason to conduct the investigation.
    This is true that I have been saying this for a few years now.
    But we don't have to listen to me on it.
    Again-- the Obama DOJ and DNI have testified that THEY SAW NO EVIDENCE of a conspiracy between Trump and Russia.
    So-- I will ask again-- what was the evidence that the FBI saw that these other guys didn't see?

    And because they could not find sufficient evidence to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia that does not mean there was no evidence. The evidence that inspired enough suspicion to motivate the FBI to investigate the Trump campaign does not cease to exist. And if we already knew the outcome of an investigation before an investigation occurred there would never be any reason to conduct any investigation ever for any question law enforcement officials might be trying to answer.
    Yes-- law enforcement has a right to be wrong.
    But they also have to have a good faith reason for thinking they were right, even if it turned out they were wrong.

    The reason why we know the Trump campaign likely did not conspire with Russia is because there was a thorough investigation of whether or not the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.
    Did you embezzle for your employer? Beat your wife? Sell drugs on the street?
    How would we know if there was no thorough investigation?
    How about we start by saying there are no facts to suspect the above.

  9. #1609
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,383

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by W_Heisenberg View Post
    This is not the same thing as Obama, himself, instigating, or somehow managing any of the Russia-related investigations. That is what you're arguing, and it's a false assertion.



    This is not an argument I'm making. I am not arguing that Obama would not have been aware of the investigation into Russia or the investigation into Flynn.
    We now know for a fact that the Obama DOJ and DNI folks did not see any evidence to suggest there was a conspiracy between Russia and Trump to fix the 2016 election.

    But we know there was such an investigation.

    So what are we trying to say now? That the Obama folks perjured themselves? Or that they permitted Mr. Comey to run a rogue operation? Seems kind of far fetched.
    The only other answer is that it was run from the White House. That fits the Page -Strzok texts where they say the White House wants to be kept informed.
    And it fits the Rice memo-- where she seeks to put the blame on Comey for an investigation which has no facts to support its claim.
    So just who are we talking about in the White House? The chief of staff?? White House counsel??




    You are suggesting, wrongly, that the USIC did not have any evidence at all and therefore the investigations were somehow bogus. This is a false statement.
    The Obama DNI and DOJ guys are suggesting it.
    Last edited by Athanasius68; 05-22-20 at 11:40 PM.

  10. #1610
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,383

    Re: U.S. judge puts on hold Justice Dept. move to dismiss Michael Flynn’s guilty plea to hear outs

    Quote Originally Posted by W_Heisenberg View Post
    That's for the jury to decide.

    And Flynn made the whole process easier for everyone by simply admitting he lied instead of putting everyone through the aggravation of a trial. Flynn did this because he knew he would lose.

    And Barr, instead of contradicting Flynn or the prosecution, did not argue that Flynn did not lie in the motion to dismiss. Instead, Barr argued that Flynn's lie was not material.
    Yes-- and if the information was available prior to it would have made a prosecution difficult as it would have made it very difficult to prove that the misleading was material.
    And as Barr had said, the standard for the DOJ will be that charges will be brought if the government believes it can can convict beyond a reasonable doubt all elements of the alleged crime.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •