CSNbbs

Full Version: Michael Flynn Plea Reversal Likely - More Corruption Likely To Be UnCovered
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Buckle Up!

On Friday, Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order in United States v. Flynn that, while widely unnoticed, reveals something fascinating: A motion by Michael Flynn to withdraw his guilty plea based on government misconduct is likely in the works.

Summarizing whats happened so far:

1. In November, Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI. The very next day, Flynn pleads guilty in front of Judge Contreras.

2. One week later, without explanation, Contreras is removed from the case. The case is reassigned to Emmet Sullivan. (We later learned that Contreras was friends with Strojk, and Strojk was going to meet with him on Flynn at a dinner party as to not arise suspicion of what he was doing. )

3. Sullivan immediately orders a Brady Order. This is nothing unusual for Sullivan, he does this for all of this cases. But in this case Flynn had already pled guilty. It is extremely rare (unheard of) for a judge to order the prosecution to turn everything over to the defense (Brady Order) after a plea is entered. Sullivan smells a rat in the prosecution. More importantly, Sullivan is moving into a precedent area. Sullivan is saying that if the prosecution holds a plea deal, and fails to reveal evidence to the defense, the defense may withdraw their plea.

4. On Wednesday, Muellers team decides not to fight Sullivan on this, and comes up with a protective order so that Flynn cant disclose evidence they are handed over.

5. The article points out that there will be known bombshells in this evidence. Evidence that McCabe and Comey both testified under oath that Flynn didnt lie. But it may also reveal other bombshells, such as collusion/coordination between Sally Yates and Peter Strojk.

6. The order says that the prosecution must turn over every bit of evidence that is identified as being helpful to Flynn. But Sullivan also ordered that any evidence that Mueller doesnt think needs to be turned over must be turned over to Sullivan so he can independently rule whether it goes to Flynn or not.

So what can we garner from this? Easy. Mueller will have to turn everything over. There will be overwhelming evidence of lying, collusion, and malfeasance on the part of Muellers team. (We already have seen proof of this.) Sullivan will then rip Muellers team a new one, and Flynn will walk free.



http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/19/mich...orruption/
So what can we garner from this...... 03-lmfao

You know nothing John Snow.
Pass the popcorn, please.
I fascinating article on the Flynn situation

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mystery...1525640861
Judge Sullivan doesn't play. Just take a look at the Ted Stevens case.
(05-07-2018 03:23 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]So what can we garner from this...... 03-lmfao

You know nothing John Snow.

lol....your boy is getting whipped all over the place. How incompetent is a prosecutor that cant even win a plea deal? Your boy is about to exposed as the unethical hack he has always been. If you think Im being unfair, look up his past record of multiple instances of unethical behavior.
The term pettifogger comes to mind.
(05-07-2018 05:38 PM)gdunn Wrote: [ -> ]The term pettifogger comes to mind.

Yep.

You have to wonder at how tight Mueller's rectum slammed shut when the random assignment went to Sullivan though. They went from a buddy on the bench to someone who doesn't tolerate BS from prosecutors and has a history of eviscerating the DOJ over their shenanigans.
(05-07-2018 03:11 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]Buckle Up!

On Friday, Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order in United States v. Flynn that, while widely unnoticed, reveals something fascinating: A motion by Michael Flynn to withdraw his guilty plea based on government misconduct is likely in the works.

Summarizing whats happened so far:

1. In November, Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI. The very next day, Flynn pleads guilty in front of Judge Contreras.

2. One week later, without explanation, Contreras is removed from the case. The case is reassigned to Emmet Sullivan. (We later learned that Contreras was friends with Strojk, and Strojk was going to meet with him on Flynn at a dinner party as to not arise suspicion of what he was doing. )

3. Sullivan immediately orders a Brady Order. This is nothing unusual for Sullivan, he does this for all of this cases. But in this case Flynn had already pled guilty. It is extremely rare (unheard of) for a judge to order the prosecution to turn everything over to the defense (Brady Order) after a plea is entered. Sullivan smells a rat in the prosecution. More importantly, Sullivan is moving into a precedent area. Sullivan is saying that if the prosecution holds a plea deal, and fails to reveal evidence to the defense, the defense may withdraw their plea.

4. On Wednesday, Muellers team decides not to fight Sullivan on this, and comes up with a protective order so that Flynn cant disclose evidence they are handed over.

5. The article points out that there will be known bombshells in this evidence. Evidence that McCabe and Comey both testified under oath that Flynn didnt lie. But it may also reveal other bombshells, such as collusion/coordination between Sally Yates and Peter Strojk.

6. The order says that the prosecution must turn over every bit of evidence that is identified as being helpful to Flynn. But Sullivan also ordered that any evidence that Mueller doesnt think needs to be turned over must be turned over to Sullivan so he can independently rule whether it goes to Flynn or not.

So what can we garner from this? Easy. Mueller will have to turn everything over. There will be overwhelming evidence of lying, collusion, and malfeasance on the part of Muellers team. (We already have seen proof of this.) Sullivan will then rip Muellers team a new one, and Flynn will walk free.



http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/19/mich...orruption/

That Mueller will ask for a delay...
(05-07-2018 05:44 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-07-2018 05:38 PM)gdunn Wrote: [ -> ]The term pettifogger comes to mind.

Yep.

You have to wonder at how tight Mueller's rectum slammed shut when the random assignment went to Sullivan though. They went from a buddy on the bench to someone who doesn't tolerate BS from prosecutors and has a history of eviscerating the DOJ over their shenanigans.

You had me at "rectum slammed"...
(05-07-2018 03:23 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]So what can we garner from this...... 03-lmfao

You know nothing John Snow.

[Image: knt6X5T.gif]
It takes a special kind of stupid to lose a case where the defendant pleaded guilty.
Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.
(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.
Oh? How so?
(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.

Go ahead and explain how requiring the prosecutor to engage in due process is judicial activism.

This might be some of the all-time best mental gymnastics we have ever seem in this forum and I'm seriously intrigued to see how Otis makes this work.
(05-07-2018 06:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.

Go ahead and explain how requiring the prosecutor to engage in due process is judicial activism.

This might be some of the all-time best mental gymnastics we have ever seem in this forum and I'm seriously intrigued to see how Otis makes this work.


Mach, you should have written a letter to the judge in Hawai'i and the one in San Francisco that they shouldn't practice politics. You do remember those two, right?
(05-07-2018 06:43 PM)olliebaba Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-07-2018 06:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.

Go ahead and explain how requiring the prosecutor to engage in due process is judicial activism.

This might be some of the all-time best mental gymnastics we have ever seem in this forum and I'm seriously intrigued to see how Otis makes this work.


Mach, you should have written a letter to the judge in Hawai'i and the one in San Francisco that they shouldn't practice politics. You do remember those two, right?

They were against Trump so it was cool.
(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.

That's absolutely hilarious coming from someone such as yourself. I hope you're kidding or have amnesia.
(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.

solid 03-lmfao

you taken your first step, take the red pill

[Image: james-earl-jones-ben-davidson-and-sven-o...n-1982.jpg]
Quote:Sullivan smells a rat in the prosecution

I'll take a stab at it.

[Image: gettyimages-170854583.jpg?quality=60&...;amp;w=940]
Pages: 1 2 3
Reference URL's