Looks like it's going into extra innings

I agree. Sullivan is being a Prima Dona and what he’s doing is unprecedented. Flynn’s cased will be tossed out on appeal. Originally Posted by bambino

Ms Powell is already on it. I don't see her going quietly into the night. My gut says, she may go so far as to start talking about his impeachment before too long. She is entirely formidable.

She is definitely a badass.

Because Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI... Plus you know Sullivan is considering charging Flynn with perjury for swearing to his own guilt and then reneging on his plea deal.

Don't forget. Flynn has admitted he lied to the FBI. That is an unchangeable fact.

Did you get that? Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Hmmmm....

So you're saying caving in to federal entrapment is like checking into the Hotel California?





Or maybe it's like the Roach Motel - where you hang out with your cockroach buddies?





Or is it like entering another scorching destination that is all too familiar to you and your lib-retard pals?

Some people are just too damn mule-headed to admit that there are stressful situations that call for extreme measures that a normal person wouldn't do in a more reasonable situation, e.g., Aron Ralston cut his own arm off to save the rest of his body.

And Flynn had to confess to lying in order to protect his son.

Climber cuts off arm to escape

(Chicago Tribune)

I could do a "if you say so" but I'll go with pointing out how wrong you are.
Sullivan's move forces the DOJ to prove they aren't being a political asshole just because they can.
Because Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. Because he lied to the FBI. Plus you know Sullivan is considering charging Flynn with perjury for swearing to his own guilt and then reneging on his plea deal.

Now you can do your "if you say so".
Don't forget. Flynn has admitted he lied to the FBI. That is an unchangeable fact. An even bigger asshole than yourself. Trump's national security advisor who calls the Russian embassy on an open line. What a douche-bag.

Did you get that? Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

I was tempted to say "I'll show you how wrong you are" with this clip but after further research, ( which I'll include after the clip ) the DC circuit court decision "Fockker" isn't as clear cut to me that it applies here but then I'm not an attorney as Sol Wisenberg is. Now, if you want to skip the some what irritating Ingraham and get to the heart of the matter, fast forward to the 3:50 mark, where Wisenberg will explain the "Focker decision" in the DC circuit court which binds Judge Sullivan's decisions.


https://www.foxnews.com/shows/ingraham-angle



Here is an explanation of the Fokker decision from Lawfare. What it comes down to is, does a judge have the right to not dismiss a case if the DOJ doesn't want the case prosecuted? To be perfectly truthful, I was positive that the judge couldn't do this but after reading the Lawfare article, I am less sure but still believe that Sullivan will not prevail if he thinks he is going to send Flynn to jail, that isn't going to happen because Trump will certainly pardon him and I believe the appeals court would reverse any decision by Sullivan to not drop this case.


https://www.lawfareblog.com/justice-department-wants-drop-flynns-case-can-judge-say-no

The Justice Department Wants to Drop Flynn’s Case. Can the Judge Say No?


It is very clear to me though why the judge feels this way, that he has a political bias against Flynn and I'll bet it is more about Trump than Flynn.


So, I just thought I'd add a little perspective to a politically heated matter.

Trump's national security advisor who calls the Russian embassy on an open line.

I'm not sure what you mean by "an open line". Open to who? It seems like the information of the phone call came from the NSA not somebody in the telephone office who happened to be listening to the phone call.


That's why the Obama people were asking for the American on the line to be unmasked. They saw this call in an intelligence report where Flynn's name was masked as the law demands. Somebody after getting that name, leaked it to the Washington Post. The alternative as you suggest was that some civilian over heard this phone call because it was an open line? Open to who, and how did they know it was General Flynn?



And I'd like to ask you if you are as upset about Obama pardoning General Cartwright who admitting to lying to the FBI as you seem to be about Flynn.



And where is this proof that Flynn lied other than his admission which begs the question, has anybody ever admitted to lying when they didn't to avoid other charges, more serious charges or perhaps to avoid your son being charged so you admit to lying when you didn't?


I'm hearing evidence that Flynn never said to the FBI, "I didn't speak to the Russian Amb.), that would indeed be a lie but what if what Flynn actually said to the FBI was, "I don't recall speaking to the Russian Amb, or what I might have said", something other prominent people like Hillary Clinton and Loretta Lynch did multiple times in talks with the FBI.


Could you be charged with lying if you said that? Is it possible from what we now know about the original 302 being "lost" and somebody other than the original FBI agents composed a subsequent 302 which is against FBI policy, that Flynn didn't lie?


There are so many things wrong with this case starting with the fact that there was nothing illegal about the phone call and who committed a felony by releasing classified information, the name of the American on that phone call, to the press. Do you have any curiosity, any concern about that part of this case? What is the difference between what Obama did, and what the DOJ just did, pardon Micheal Flynn?


Back to the unmasking. Every one of those people including Joe Biden, had to explain in writing why they were requesting the unmasking. Will the liberal press ask Biden what his reason was wanting to know who the American on that phone call was just a week or so before leaving office?


Are you curious and have concerns over Susan Rice asking if the outgoing administration should share what they have on Russia meddling with the new President and his administration? Really? Is that in the best interest of the country for the outgoing President to keep secrets from the incoming President? I can think of one reason why Obama might do that. To keep Trump from knowing the details of Obama's spying and an attempt to present a false narrative that Trump was a Russian spy all in the name of keeping Trump from tearing down what Obama had built, well, I guess you can say that any more because "he" didn't exactly build anything as he reminded us "You didn't build that".


Here is another clip from Ingraham for anybody interested in an explanation of the timeline of the unmasking and who the players are. I think it is valuable information but only to those with what I call an "intellectual curiosity" Which of course Trump haters do not possess. It just confuses the people when they hear the truth about what the Obama administration was doing on their way out the door.


https://www.foxnews.com/shows/ingraham-angle



Nothing matters but "getting Trump" and the ends, the illegal ends, justify the means when it is a Republican you are after.

And where is this proof that Flynn lied other than his admission which begs the question, has anybody ever admitted to lying when they didn't to avoid other charges, more serious charges or perhaps to avoid your son being charged so you admit to lying when you didn't?

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

I was getting the hell beat out of me by an adult when I was ten years old

they kept hitting me hard in the face with their open hand over and over as I staunchly denied what they wanted me to admit to

and every time they hit me my head would bash off the wooden side of a bunk bed until I would have short moments of black out with every hit

and I finally admitted to something I didn't do to get it to stop

I swore I would never admit to a lie again

i'm sure General Flynn feels the same

Trump can’t pardon him until he’s convicted. Originally Posted by bambino

My post didn't mean to address the "pardonability" issue. I'm saying by Judge Sullivan asking for amicus briefs, Trump and the DOJ is seeing who unveils themselves as a possible collaborator.

isn't Sullivan defying his bosses the DOJ by not dismissing the case? don't people who defy their boss usually get fired?



also if the DOJ is dropping the case how can Sullivan even convict Flynn now? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Judge Sullivan has already conceded he has no authority to ask for "friend of the court briefs" in this case. Only in civil cases. Strange, huh?

I was getting the hell beat out of me by an adult when I was ten years old

they kept hitting me in the face with their open hand over and over as I staunchly denied what they wanted me to admit to

and every time they hit me my head would bash off the wooden side of a bunk bed until I would have short moments of black out with every hit

and I finally admitted to something I didn't do to get it to stop

I swore I would never admit to a lie again

i'm sure General Flynn feels the same Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

How many times have we seen and heard Black kids ( and White and Hispanic ) admit to things they didn't do because of hours of interrogations and the cop says "if you just tell us you did this, you can go home ) and unbelievable to us not having been interrogated without a lawyer for hours, say yes, I did it and then ask "can I go home now"?


Everybody including Munchman knows this to be true but he can not envision that this happened to Michael Flynn. No, Flynn lied and he can't take it back! Of course you can. That is the beauty of America, that at any time you can tell the truth and explain why you did what you did and in my opinion the legal community has an obligation at any time to hear your truth. Isn't that what we heard in the Kavanaugh hearing? It's never to late to tell your truth?


Well, General Flynn is now telling his truth and we have an obligation to him to listen because one day it might be us coerced into a false confession because of threats made to us or our family or is that how we want law enforcement in America to work?


But it seems that Judge Sullivan for some reason, doesn't want General Flynn to tell us that he was mistreated at the hands of the FBI and that is a shame.


The only argue that I can see, that this new outside judge could present is actually that. "He lied and he can't take it back". What else is there to present? You can't present an underlying crime because there wasn't one. You can't provide a recording that I am aware of, of what General Flynn actually said that day the FBI interviewed him. You only have the word of the two agents that he lied and even that is in question and can not in my opinion be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.


Throw in the fact that President Obama pardoned General Cartwright for doing the exact same thing Flynn did or they say he did and admitted to under coercion IMHO and you do have the precedent that Obama stunningly said didn't exist when he was the precedent.


There is no good reason to proceed with this case. There is no good reason to not dismiss a case that the DOJ says should never have been brought in the first case and has clearly explained why.


But the real topper here is the hand written note from the head of the FBI Counter Intelligence "what is our goal, truth/ admission or to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired". The fact that memo was uncovered which was surely known by Director Wrey if he knew what he was doing but did not provide the exculpatory evidence, is reason enough for an unbiased judge to dismiss this case.

judge emmit sullivan was appointed by bush 41, republican judge.

... No, Flynn lied and he can't take it back!..... Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Something needs to be done about this "the govt can lie to you but you can't lie to the govt" rhetoric.

I could do a "if you say so" but I'll go with pointing out how wrong you are.
Sullivan's move forces the DOJ to prove they aren't being a political asshole just because they can.
Because Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. Because he lied to the FBI. Plus you know Sullivan is considering charging Flynn with perjury for swearing to his own guilt and then reneging on his plea deal.

Now you can do your "if you say so".
Don't forget. Flynn has admitted he lied to the FBI. That is an unchangeable fact. An even bigger asshole than yourself. Trump's national security advisor who calls the Russian embassy on an open line. What a douche-bag.

Did you get that? Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

if you say so

judge emmit sullivan was appointed by bush 41, republican judge. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Sullivan was appointed to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia by Slick Willie. (Wiki)

we got to get away from trying conservatives in washington dc

there is no justice for such in jury nor in judge

Sullivan was appointed to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia by Slick Willie. (Wiki) Originally Posted by I B Hankering

actually, he's a Reagan judge before going upstairs to higher court. i looked at the wiki page incorrectly.

he was prolly one of those compromise judges that had to clear a democrat majority in the senate.

Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia
In office 1984–1992
Appointed by Ronald Reagan

Associate Judge of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
In office 1992–1994
Appointed by George H. W. Bush

Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Incumbent Assumed office
June 16, 1994
Appointed by Bill Clinton

...explain the "Focker decision" in the DC circuit court which binds Judge Sullivan's decisions. Originally Posted by HedonistForever

How did the Fockers get dragged into this?? Must be that sneaky ex-CIA bastard Jack Byrnes!!