Judge Sullivan Disregards Two Controlling Precedents By Appointing Amicus In Flynn Case

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
Sadly, this is false.

There have been many surveys conducted on the psychology of Trump supporters and they do not in any way support your false statement.

Sadly, those like you have sought to conduct such "studies" and use them to justify their own personal pathologies.

I would disagree. I think Trump and Putin are two peas in a pod.

I think the Magnitsky Act will disappear and you will have a nervous breakdown - and still I will not care. The rest of us have our own lives to live, believe it or not.

Why would you think I assume that?

Because you talk like you hope it will happen.

This is not something I am suggesting.

But with respect to the corruption endemic within Russia, our interests are aligned.

Corruption is bad for modern liberal democracies.

Especially corruption that leads to false accusations of collusion meant to undermine the legitimacy of elections, as has occurred for the past 4 years.

It is clear to me that you don't understand the concept of a mutually beneficial relationship.

No, Americans would never accept NATO becoming a yoke around their necks, shackling Americans to a neverending conflict that sees their own sovereign right to democratic franchise undermined and delegitimized.

My saying so doesn't make me some stooge of Russia.

And if you tell me, "but that's what Putin would want you to say" - I don't care. My thoughts are my own, and if you can't accept that, I don't care.

Latest-All-Day%E2%80%99s-Memes-Captain-America.jpg

sanman · May 22, 2020

What if...? said:
He signed a confession that he lied to the FBI. It is part of every plea agreement: acceptance of responsibility.

He withdrew the plea, it happens all the time. The original plea was the result of PLEA-BARGAINING (ie. If you plead guilty to Russia-related stuff as I want you to do, then I won't prosecute you over this non-Russia stuff)

They specifically wanted him to plead guilty to something Russia-related, for their own political reasons.

Withdrawing his plea in this case is saying he didn't do what he swore he did. So his confession is perjury.

No, people change their guilty pleas all the time - calling that perjury is like a double-jeopardy, because under the 5th Amendment being required to testify against yourself is invalid.

sanman · May 22, 2020

What if...? said:
So Barr tried to retroactively dismiss another case after a plea was entered and accepted?

This case was already settled.

Exculpatory evidence has emerged, Jan-4-2017 memo shows investigation was declared invalid, thus rendering any questioning for it invalid.

It will require a judge to dismiss it. It doesn't just go away because Barr says so.

Judge's role in dismissal is merely ministerial.

Sullivan has appointed Gleeson to do the Amicus, and Gleeson has himself already argued in the past that prosecution has unchallengeable ("unreviewable") authority to withdraw cases, and that it would be an "abuse of discreton" by any judge to deny this.

Ex-judge appointed to argue against dismissing Flynn case once wrote about 'abuse of discretion" | Just The News

Gleeson wrote about a case in 2013 that if the government moved to dismiss it would represent "an abuse of discretion to deny that motion."

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
With respect to corruption, U.S. interests and the interests of European countries are aligned.

With respect to Western cultural, legal, or political values, they need not be attached to any specific ethnic or racial group.

Not all European countries are free of corruption. Not all non-European countries are full of corruption.

I prefer a unite-and-rule policy based on Civic Nationalism, that promotes unity based on a common set of values and principles.

Trump certainly supports civic nationalism, and meanwhile Clintons were all about corruption and derisively calling many Americans "deplorables"

Democrats were corrupting state and civic institutions in the service of globalism.

On the one hand, you say "I'm the globalist" and then on the other hand, you flip around to say you prefer "civic nationalism" - sorry, but the two are not the same.
It's so easy to catch your Freudian slips and hypocrisies. You talk like a teenager.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
Trump's pushback strategy against economic weaknesses with respect to China are the result of having appointed a team of veteran experts who have carved out this strategy, without being hostage to any particular party.

I don't believe it. Someone is going to bribe Trump at the last minute and Trump will cave. It's a shame you have such faith in someone who is clearly a two-bit, petty con-man.

I understand - just because someone has different policy views than you, then you want to call them "corrupt idiot-in-chief" I felt the same way about the Clintons

Nope. I have voted for Republicans before. The policy differences don't matter as much to me as other things such as the ability to lead and moral character. And it is objectively true that Trump is a bad person who does bad things. Trump is a corrupt person. He always has been,

No, this is your conflated propaganda-driven narrative. You are willing to believe in any conspiracy theory and any caricature in order to advance your views over those of American voters. To the extent that this political game has been used to paralyze govt and squander the time and resources of the public, then this game will have to be opened up to investigation and debunked, including with appropriate criminal charges against those who have gone so far as to have broken the law.

It's all based on facts. We know Trump cheated on his wife with a pornstar. We know Trump routinely screwed over his subcontractors. We know Trump committed tax fraud. We know Trump lied about his personal wealth. We know Trump scammed people using fake charities. We know Trump broke the law with respect to campaign finance laws (he was an unindicted co-conspirator in the case that sent his personal attorney to prison), we know Trump obstructed justice on at least 4 separate occasions during the Special Counsel's investigation, we know Trump has lied over 16,000 times since assuming office, and we know Trump tried to coerce Ukraine into helping him win in the 2020 election. All of these things are true. And all of these things indicate, and objectively so, that Trump is a person of poor moral character and has demonstrated a corrupt approach to business and politics.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
I don't know how your comment relates to what I've said, other than that it reflects the desire of certain foreign lobbies to retain control over US foreign policy no matter what - even to the extent of breaking US law through misuse of law enforcement powers.

You described the U.S. approach to Russia as "unrelenting hostility." But it's not a hostile act to refrain from conducting business or trading with a foreign country or officials of a foreign country. It's a choice. You cannot force someone to do business with another. And you cannot force nations to do business with other nations.

You cannot control the United States or get the American people to bend towards your foreign policy agenda. It's not for you to dictate what the policy should be by overriding the elections or challenging their legitimacy. Legitimacy of the elections is not based on whether or not your policy agenda gets chosen by the electorate. You'll just have to learn how to lose gracefully.

This comment of yours has nothing to do with anything I or anyone else has said or done.

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
You described the U.S. approach to Russia as "unrelenting hostility." But it's not a hostile act to refrain from conducting business or trading with a foreign country or officials of a foreign country. It's a choice. You cannot force someone to do business with another. And you cannot force nations to do business with other nations.

If you prefer the word "unfriendly act" then whatever - but the choice seems to be coming from extraterritorialist foreign lobbies who've set up shop in Washington, DC, rather than the choice coming from the grassroots American people.
Foreign extraterritorialist lobbies have learned how to infest the power structure in the capitol, to have their way no matter what.

This comment of yours has nothing to do with anything I or anyone else has said or done.

Oh, but it does - it has to do with the dislike of Trump in some quarters of official Washington, and the attempt to have him ousted from office in an illegal coup d'etat. I agree with Trump when he says that the game played against Flynn was actually intended to ultimately go after Trump himself, with the goal of removing him from office.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
Maria Korbel

What is the purpose of using her maiden name? Why are you doing this?

I remember during her senate confirmation hearings she was rightly criticized as an Atlanticist who mainly obsessed over Europe.

This is a very strange word to use as an insult within the context of American politics and foreign policy.

Nearly every U.S. Senator at the time of Albright's confirmation and nearly every U.S. Senator who currently holds off is an Atlanticist to one degree or another. Who criticized her as being an Atlanticist?

Again, you wear your biases on your sleeve.

Why would I not wear my biases on my sleeve?

We have no obligation to support the maidan putsch in Kiev against people of Eastern Ukraine. It was an unlawful theft of power without obtaining an electoral mandate.

This is how I know you are a Putin-lover.

Likewise, those who have attempted their coup against elected US President Donald J Trump must be held accountable for criminal wrongdoing, and even treason.

I am afraid you do not understand what the word coup means.

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
I don't believe it. Someone is going to bribe Trump at the last minute and Trump will cave. It's a shame you have such faith in someone who is clearly a two-bit, petty con-man.

No, Trump intends to make turning the tide against China his legacy. Meanwhile, it's a shame you can't see how Clintons did a UraniumOne deal with Russia, and have such faith in them despite their criminality.

Nope. I have voted for Republicans before. The policy differences don't matter as much to me as other things such as the ability to lead and moral character. And it is objectively true that Trump is a bad person who does bad things. Trump is a corrupt person. He always has been,

Nah, I disagree - "perfect is the enemy of the good" - and Trump, on the whole, is far better than the Clintons and Obama, under whom America by all measures became weaker.

It's all based on facts. We know Trump cheated on his wife with a pornstar. We know Trump routinely screwed over his subcontractors. We know Trump committed tax fraud. We know Trump lied about his personal wealth. We know Trump scammed people using fake charities. We know Trump broke the law with respect to campaign finance laws (he was an unindicted co-conspirator in the case that sent his personal attorney to prison), we know Trump obstructed justice on at least 4 separate occasions during the Special Counsel's investigation, we know Trump has lied over 16,000 times since assuming office, and we know Trump tried to coerce Ukraine into helping him win in the 2020 election. All of these things are true. And all of these things indicate, and objectively so, that Trump is a person of poor moral character and has demonstrated a corrupt approach to business and politics.

I don't care about Trump & pornstar, just like libs don't care about BJ Clinton's bj's or his numerous flings, or JFK's. Your badmouthing of Trump doesn't bother me, when the other candidates are far worse.
Biden's senile and corrupt.

Biden openly bragged about coercing Ukraine - over his kid, no less:

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
That legislation came from Congress, and it's possible such legislation may be overturned in the future.

Another interesting comment.

Nations make choices through their elections - that is their right. It's not the right of a narrowly obsessed group of individuals to override the policy choices expressed through those elections.

Nobody is doing that.

If someone does this as a de facto coup d'etat, then they'll have to face consequences for it. If you don't like that, tough luck, I don't care.

So, I don't know what things are like in your home country, but here, in the U.S. we have this thing called the Rule of Law, and here, even Presidents must abide by it.

The Dept of Justice is investigating the possible illegal activities carried out by members of the state against the Trump campaign, and indictments will be coming. If you don't like that, tough luck, I don't care. Stasi tactics used inside the US to thwart the will of the American electorate will be punished. If you don't like that, then tough luck, I don't care.

Nothing's going to happen. They didn't do anything wrong. You're going to be very disappointed.

If you have become like those you hate, then I'm sorry but everyone else cannot be held hostage to your personal pathologies.

Yes, I do have a pathology, it's called a moral compass.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
I think the Magnitsky Act will disappear and you will have a nervous breakdown - and still I will not care. The rest of us have our own lives to live, believe it or not.

You seem oddly interested in wanting the Magnitsky Act repealed.

Especially corruption that leads to false accusations of collusion meant to undermine the legitimacy of elections, as has occurred for the past 4 years.

If you don't want the FBI to investigate you then don't try to make deals with Russian agents. It's not that complicated.

No, Americans would never accept NATO becoming a yoke around their necks, shackling Americans to a neverending conflict that sees their own sovereign right to democratic franchise undermined and delegitimize.

NATO is one of the most successful, longest enduring military alliances in human history.

My saying so doesn't make me some stooge of Russia.

Nearly every other comment you write is oddly pro-Russian. Let me be more specific, nearly every other comment you write is oddly pro-Putin.

Unitedwestand13 · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
You seem oddly interested in wanting the Magnitsky Act repealed.

If you don't want the FBI to investigate you then don't try to make deals with Russian agents. It's not that complicated.

NATO is one of the most successful, longest enduring military alliances in human history.

Nearly every other comment you write is oddly pro-Russian. Let me be more specific, nearly every other comment you write is oddly pro-Putin.

Really? Let’s test that?

Thank goodness that tyrant Viktor Yanukovych is no longer abusing the people of ukraine

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
What is the purpose of using her maiden name? Why are you doing this?

I'm highlighting what her ethno-racial biases are, which have given rise to her particular foreign policy slant. Blood is thicker than water, as evinced by her foreign policy.

This is a very strange word to use as an insult within the context of American politics and foreign policy.

Nearly every U.S. Senator at the time of Albright's confirmation and nearly every U.S. Senator who currently holds off is an Atlanticist to one degree or another. Who criticized her as being an Atlanticist?

It was said in testimony at her hearings.

Why would I not wear my biases on my sleeve?

Why would I submit to them? We don't all revolve around you, or what you find important.

This is how I know you are a Putin-lover.

No, I don't see myself as a Putin-lover, I see myself as upholding core values which you pretend to like but which you actually do not.
Instead of calling me a Putin-lover, you should have acknowledged the putsch carried out by your friends in the maidan, and how it politically disenfranchised those who voted for Yanuckovych.
People have a right to vote for whomever they want, and just because you don't like that you don't have a right to throw them out through a putsch.
The putchists in the FBI will have to learn that lesson too, the hard way - through criminal prosecution.

I am afraid you do not understand what the word coup means.

Oh, I think I do, and that you do not. It means that you undemocratically throw out of power someone who you don't like - whether it's Trump, or Yanuckovych, or whoever.
Coups are unconstitutional, and punishable as treason. This is the real treason charge which is coming.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
Not all European countries are free of corruption. Not all non-European countries are full of corruption.

This is not something I have ever spoken, or written, or even thought.

Trump certainly supports civic nationalism

Trump does not in any way support civic nationalism.

and meanwhile Clintons were all about corruption and derisively calling many Americans "deplorable"

That's okay. We can criticize Clinton and we can also criticize Trump.

Democrats were corrupting state and civic institutions in the service of globalism.

This is a silly thing to say given the history of each party's dominant politicians and their foreign policy stances.

On the one hand, you say "I'm the globalist" and then on the other hand, you flip around to say you prefer "civic nationalism" - sorry, but the two are not the same.

They are not the same, but in my view, in accordance with my definition of globalism, and the actual practical implementation of it, these two ideas complement each other.

It's so easy to catch your Freudian slips and hypocrisies. You talk like a teenager.

You talk like someone who comes from a corrupt country who does not understand nor care for the Rule of Law.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
If you prefer the word "unfriendly act" then whatever - but the choice seems to be coming from extraterritorialist foreign lobbies who've set up shop in Washington, DC, rather than the choice coming from the grassroots American people.

Why don't you just cut the bull crap and accurately describe what is really on your mind?

Which lobby are you referring to when you write "extraterritoralist" foreign lobby?

Foreign extraterritorialist lobbies have learned how to infest the power structure in the capitol, to have their way no matter what.

Stop being shy and say it. Which foreign extraterritorialist lobby?

Oh, but it does - it has to do with the dislike of Trump in some quarters of official Washington, and the attempt to have him ousted from office in an illegal coup d'etat. I agree with Trump when he says that the game played against Flynn was actually intended to ultimately go after Trump himself, with the goal of removing him from office.

Some quarters of Washington...

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
You seem oddly interested in wanting the Magnitsky Act repealed.

Only because you seem oddly interested in mentioning it. As I've mentioned, we all have our lives to live, and you'll have to accept that we don't all revolve around you or what you want.

If you don't want the FBI to investigate you then don't try to make deals with Russian agents. It's not that complicated.

No, Flynn as the incoming national security advisor is supposed to talk with foreign officials, whether Russian or otherwise, and the FBI in its Jan-4-2017 memo said there was nothing improper in his calls. People should not be investigated because they bring new policy views with them as they come into office as part of their mandate.

NATO is one of the most successful, longest enduring military alliances in human history.

Trump made it more successful, by forcing delinquent members to pay up their fair share of dues. Sometimes it takes tough love to improve success.

Nearly every other comment you write is oddly pro-Russian. Let me be more specific, nearly every other comment you write is oddly pro-Putin.

Only because every other comment you write is weirdly fixated on Putin and Russia. As I've mentioned before, we all have our own lives to live for, and can't be revolving around your wants.
Plenty of other concerns to worry about, and such fixations become irritating.

Do you get out much? Or am I arguing with some wheelchair-bound teenage invalid? You sound like a teenager to me because of your maturity level, or lack of it.
A teenager should spend their time on better things than obsessing over Putin.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
No, Trump intends to make turning the tide against China his legacy.

Yeah, his legacy of failure.

Meanwhile, it's a shame you can't see how Clintons did a UraniumOne deal with Russia, and have such faith in them despite their criminality.

They didn't do anything wrong with respect to the Uranium One deal, just more pro-Trump garbage propaganda.

Nah, I disagree - "perfect is the enemy of the good" - and Trump, on the whole, is far better than the Clintons and Obama, under whom America by all measures became weaker.

We don't need a perfect President. That's not what I require.

Trump is a thoroughly corrupt, incompetent, and stupid man, unfit for the office of the President.

Your badmouthing of Trump doesn't bother me

I know. Many Trump supporters don't care because many Trump supporters do not have a moral compass.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
I'm highlighting what her ethno-racial biases are, which have given rise to her particular foreign policy slant. Blood is thicker than water, as evinced by her foreign policy.

Okay, be specific. Let's see if you have the courage to say this publicly.

Which specific ethno-racial biases do you think she has?

It was said in testimony at her hearings.

Are you sure you weren't listening to the Russian translation of the hearings? Who said it and what did they say, exactly?

Why would I submit to them? We don't all revolve around you, or what you find important.

I'm not asking you to submit to them. I am not asking you to revolve around me. I am not asking you to find important what I find important.

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
INo, I don't see myself as a Putin-lover, I see myself as upholding core values which you pretend to like but which you actually do not.

What core values are those that you think you're holding up?

Instead of calling me a Putin-lover, you should have acknowledged the putsch carried out by your friends in the maidan, and how it politically disenfranchised those who voted for Yanuckovych.

And where is Yanuckovych now, my friend?

Which country does he call home...now...

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
Oh, I think I do, and that you do not. It means that you undemocratically throw out of power someone who you don't like - whether it's Trump, or Yanuckovych, or whoever. Coups are unconstitutional, and punishable as treason. This is the real treason charge which is coming.

I cannot speak for Ukraine.

I can speak for the U.S.

Investigations, either by the DOJ, or by Congress, and impeachment processes, and Senate trials for impeachment are legal, Constitutional methods of removing a corrupt president from power.

A coup is a violent, illegal overthrow of an existing government authority. You are abusing the word coup for propaganda purposes.

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
Yeah, his legacy of failure.

He seems to be having more success in this particular regard than his predecessors, which is why so many people like him.

They didn't do anything wrong with respect to the Uranium One deal, just more pro-Trump garbage propaganda.

So you support this nuclear acquisition deal with Russia? I don't have any problem with the deal itself, other than her doing it and then pointing the finger at Trump over Russia.

We don't need a perfect President. That's not what I require.

Trump is a thoroughly corrupt, incompetent, and stupid man, unfit for the office of the President.

I see him as fit enough for office, and haven't seen any corruption scandals happening during his presidency.
Clintons have had more than their fair share of corruption scandals.

I know. Many Trump supporters don't care because many Trump supporters do not have a moral compass.

To you it seems that way, since your compass can only point towards Europe. As I've said, not everybody is like you and the rest of us have our own lives to live, which don't revolve around your particular narrow preferences.

Bush was likewise willing to engage with Russia. Your main grievance with Russia seems to be over Ukraine - but if you didn't like Putin's response, then why do the maidan coup?

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
No, Flynn as the incoming national security advisor is supposed to talk with foreign officials, whether Russian or otherwise, and the FBI in its Jan-4-2017 memo said there was nothing improper in his calls. People should not be investigated because they bring new policy views with them as they come into office as part of their mandate.

Flynn wasn't investigated because he had different views. Flynn was investigated because the Russian government paid him, and he was involved in the Trump campaign, and the Russian government conducted an intelligence operation against the U.S. in which it targeted the Trump campaign. Flynn was interviewed by the FBI after he lied to Pence about the nature of his calls with Kislyak.

Trump made it more successful, by forcing delinquent members to pay up their fair share of dues. Sometimes it takes tough love to improve success.

That's not the origin of the controversy. Both Trump and yourself do not understand how NATO funding works, and also do not understand the discrepancy between U.S. and European funding.

Donald Trump Says NATO Allies Owe the U.S. Money. He'''s Wrong | Time

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
Only because every other comment you write is weirdly fixated on Putin and Russia. As I've mentioned before, we all have our own lives to live for, and can't be revolving around your wants. Plenty of other concerns to worry about, and such fixations become irritating.

The topic of this thread is Flynn's case. Flynn's lie concerned his call with Kislyak, a Russian Ambassador to the U.S., and the topic of his call with Kislyak was U.S. sanctions on Russia.

So, yes, I am talking about Russia, Putin, and Russian sanctions, and things related to those topics, because they are all related to the topic of this thread.

sanman · May 22, 2020

W_Heisenberg said:
I cannot speak for Ukraine.

I can speak for the U.S.

I don't feel you can speak for either - not credibly, anyway.

Investigations, either by the DOJ, or by Congress, and impeachment processes, and Senate trials for impeachment are legal, Constitutional methods of removing a corrupt president from power.

Stasi/KGB/GRU methods are not legal. Officials speaking on national media who were saying they saw evidence of collusion with Russia, then said the opposite when testifying under oath in front of Congress. The reason for this naked doublespeak is that they know they can say anything on TV, no matter how false, and will not be held accountable for it. But lying to Congress under oath is a crime, which is why they dared not repeat their falsehoods in that different venue.
I can say Trump is the son of Martians on national TV, but I can't say that when testifying to Congress under oath, or I will have to go to jail.

You don't understand this, because you are a teenager, and that's why you and others like you believe these falsehoods you've heard (and also because of the fact that you're naive and mentally lazy not to question things more)

A coup is a violent, illegal overthrow of an existing government authority. You are abusing the word coup for propaganda purposes.[/QUOTE]

W_Heisenberg · May 22, 2020

sanman said:
Do you get out much? Or am I arguing with some wheelchair-bound teenage invalid? You sound like a teenager to me because of your maturity level, or lack of it. A teenager should spend their time on better things than obsessing over Putin.

You sound like someone who does not care about the Rule of Law and spends his time insulting people who do care about the Rule of Law.