Judge Calls For Full Appeals Court Review Of Ruling Dropping Michael Flynn Charges

what’s your point? obviously trump didn’t have all the evidence and didn’t believe that obama would have see obamagate in action. he certainly was mistaken about that

 

well we have the transcript now so maybe you could show us all....

 

I'll refer you to post 21.

 

LOL at the phrase 'litigation boutique'.... Now THAT's marketing...

I'm not following this argument fully, since I've had that poster of FULLY DESERVED ignore for several months, but is he questioning Wilkinson's standing to submit this brief??

Man, the levels of desperation never fail to amaze...

I fully expect the full en banc court to take this up, and not let a small partisan subset misrepresent and misuse existing law...

Still waiting for the en banc results of the McGahn case... That was argued late April.... They move slower than the SCOTUS...

 

Actually documents have been produced and are a matter of public record now and have been filed in Sullivan's court. LINK: New documents show internal debate over whether to prosecute Flynn] LINK: The newly released documents here And there are others. You can look the rest up yourself.

 

LOLOLOL... yes, those handwritten notes exonerate Flynn.... What legal world do you live in?

All those show is that there was a lot of confusion of how to handle a corrupt future administration member... Most administrations actually wait until they become the administration, but not the Trump regime....

 

Obviously you haven't read them. Since...well...you know...they DID state that they believed Flynn to be innocent and not lying, and therefore not corrupt like you try to claim here.

 

No they don't.... You are being completely misled, but that's your right as a citizen... Enjoy your freedoms to go down rabbit holes..

 

Read it yourself. Says it right there in black and white. Page 7 and 10 if you want to be lead by the nose to it.

 

At least one more

 

He's only an admitted felon because of entrapment.

 

No... you are doing so well so far... please snip whatever out of that document proves your claim that the FBI says Flynn is innocent...

 

He is not a defendant but by law can petition the appeals court. In this case it is a delaying tactic.

 

Yes.
I had a dishwasher like him once. It got into a loop of rinse and repeat.

 

Then they can tie Flynn relevantly to the Russian issue? They should have no problem establishing that, oh wait even when Flynn signed the plea agreement they didn't/couldn't elaborate because....:

"No American has been charged with a crime related to this indictment. No American will be charged or suspected of a crime related to this indictment."-Rod Rosenstein. The facts are simply out there, Michael Flynn had no material involvement with the Russian investigation and the FBI confirmed that to themselves("he's not an agent of Russia") MULTIPLE times.

It's no longer possible to go "well, he plea'd", the plea agreement in of itself doesn't rob the government of its obligations under Brady, and in many such cases in the past, present and future newly uncovered evidence has always led to some form of a new judgment.

Not only is there not an indictable case on Michael Flynn(by the FBI's own words), but by the simple facts of the uncovered information Flynn is entitled to a trial with due process rights on his innnocence under the law. Further, Judge Sullivan's impartiality has been put into serious question, not only did he indirectly question the 'motives' of the DOJ, when the DOJ moved to dismiss its motion he put a former judge as a stand-in!

Not just any "former judge" mind you, this "friend of the court" happens to coincide with what we can presume to be the judge's preset determination via an op-ED. A FREAKING OP-ED as if the optics don't get worse that happens to lay out a perjury argument, 48 hours after former President Obama cried that he should be charged with perjury.

Only problem is, that wasn't the actual charge of the government at the time. So they had to come up with a novel argument that goes something like this: "Flynn pled guilty, but now he maintains his innocence he lied to the court!". That argument is absolutely preposterous and if he didn't have a preset determination then there's no way any judge, on this full circuit or any circuit could possibly consider it.

At a minimum, if the full circuit were to agree to these ridiculous terms, they should be strictly limited to the ACTUAL case that was before the Court and not creating new cases out of thin air. Also at a minimum, if we were to agree to these ridiculous terms Sullivan would have to withdraw the guilty plea and set a trial date, where we will muster the defense for our client with the discovered evidence, and no doubt on cross-examination we'll discover more. Specifically, I'd love to cross-examine the agents in question including former FBI director James Comey who bragged on television that he could just "send them in" without warning of telling my client of the 1001 or that he's even under investigation.

However, I merely feel that's the minimum this court can do to restore order to the case. The most you can do, is to uphold the mandamus, hold this corrupt official's feet to the fire and have him fulfill his responsibilities under the law. We have historically held through countless precedence that just because you don't like the law or the decisions of the law that doesn't give you the right to violate it. That's what Sullivan is asking for, under the guise of "asking questions". We respectfully ask this full circuit to uphold that precedence once again, even though I never thought we'd have to ask this or any circuit such a fundamental simplicity, but that's where we are right now.

 

Come on now you know as well as I do Judge Sullivan hates Trump and wants to punish him and anyone who ever worked for him. Seriously when did judges start telling prosecutors you can't abort a prosecution?




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmet_G._Sullivan

 

The terminology is different. Now, about that bridge?

 

Who are you quoting?

 

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make em drink.

I've provided the link to you. Told you what pages to look at. I'm not going to do any more for you. Educate yourself. Trust me, it won't hurt you.

 

so toy aren’t a lawyer?

 

i admire tour howedy

 

He also had to apologize to General Flynn after he basically called him a traitor to the Nation.

He does not get to request an appeal. He's a judge, not a prosecutor. This guy has turned out to be a total goof and what is wrong with the judiciary.

 

I said......US justice system terminology is different from what it is down here. Additionally, our judicial system is not ultimately lethally poisoned by politics as you have there. Yours is now in its death throes. This Flynn saga is the perfect illustration. Everyone seems to want to bend over backwards to let a lying ar*sehole walk. Trump has just let off his close personal mate Stone, with a commutation. That just does not happen in our political/judicial system. It is abhorrent to me.

 

I'm sorry I don't know if it's a typo or what but I don't know what tour howedy means.

 

so in Australia entrapment isn't wrong as long as it gets the right person?

No the charges were dropped because they weren't legitimate in the first place. The only thing that's in the throes is an activist judge who is trying to defy upper courts to crucify somebody.

no, first a lie is an intentional subversion of the truth. Flynn knew that the FBI already had the recordings there wasn't any reason to lie. What happened to Flynn was the FBI lied to him, and he agreed with the law by not having heard the recording.

So in your system you lock up people because they were entrapped?

Well if that's true about your system I don't think it is I just think you're being blinded by your politics and distaste for Donald Trump. But if it is true about your justice system your justice system is a mockery of the term Justice.

Flynn didn't lie the FBI did, the most incompetent bureau that couldn't pour water out of a boot if the instructions were printed on the heel.

If someone commits a crime because of entrapment, the charges are always dismissed we don't prosecute people in the US because incompetent police just want to put them in jail.