Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECONDRATE, being a rich guy, has no issues spending money on private investigators. He knows for a fact that I'm not a "Russian troll".

But THUGR, being the idiot that he is, believes people who lie to him.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SO, to recap the Flynn case ...

---

Let's recap: you are a Russian Troll, Signym.

On December 29, 2016, then-President Obama imposed sanctions on Russia for having interfered in the election. Incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn called Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and asked Russia not to escalate the situation in response to the sanctions. The following day, Putin announced that Russia would not take retaliatory measures in response to the sanctions at that time. Hours later, President-Elect Trump tweeted, “Great move on delay (by V. Putin).” The next day, on December 31, 2016, Kislyak called Flynn and told him the request had been received at the highest levels and Russia had chosen not to retaliate as a result of Flynn’s request.

Third, the investigation established that several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office, and to Congress, about their interactions with Russian-affiliated individuals and related matters. Those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference. The Office charged some of those lies as violations of the federal false-statements statute. Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying about his interactions with Russian Ambassador Kislyak during the transition period. George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy advisor during the campaign period, pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about, inter alia, the nature and timing of his interactions with Joseph Mifsud, the professor who told Papadopoulos that the Russians had dirt on candidate Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. Former Trump Organization attorney Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to making false statements to Congress about the Trump Moscow project.

From the Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election
Volume I of II
Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III
www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND

DEFAMATION ... blah blah blah ... Russia ... blah blah bah... Trump .... blah blah blah

---

FIFY

---

Hey Russian Troll: Besides some other major crimes, Flynn got caught in a very minor crime: talking on the phone to the Russian ambassador. In exchange for cooperation with Mueller's investigation of Russian interference with the 2016 election, Flynn was only charged with lying about that phone call. But Trump thinks he and Attorney General Barr can free Flynn of that minor charge without using a Presidential Pardon. Maybe they can. If the judge does sentence Flynn, maybe Trump will use a pardon on Flynn. Who knows? Certainly not Trump. He is too stupid to plan 180 days ahead. Ask John Bolton's staff about how dumb Trump is. They will give you an earful: https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1273347802026979328

Dec 18, 2018 - Here's what Michael Flynn has admitted
www.axios.com/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-kislyak-russia-turkey-8d185a76
-980c-4d6b-8fe6-daa712b3da78.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Hey second. I think you've upset sig the Russian troll.

T

Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Second, I think I've pissed off sig the russian troll.

T

Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hey SERIAL DEFAMER: TALKING WITH THE RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR IS NOT A CRIME.

You're such a liar. You have NO PROBLEM spreading lies, including lies about me.

---

Your answer reveals that you are a Russian Troll. And you're as stupid as Trump: FBI's interview with Flynn, revealing what exactly the former national security adviser lied about.

Flynn told the FBI that in his conversations with Kislyak during the presidential transition, he did not attempt to influence Russia's vote on a UN Security Council resolution concerning Israeli settlements. He admitted in his charging document in Mueller's case that a senior member of the Trump transition team directed him to contact Kislyak to learn where Russia stood and urge them to vote against the resolution. Stupid Signym, do you understand the contradiction between what Flynn told the FBI and what Flynn actually did on the phone?

Flynn also told the FBI that he did not ask Kislyak to refrain from escalating tensions in response to steps taken by Barack Obama over Moscow's election meddling, which included expelling alleged Russian spies and closing two Russian diplomatic compounds in the U.S. Flynn later admitted that, acting on behalf of a senior member of Trump's transition team, he contacted Kislyak to ask that Russia show restraint. Vladimir Putin ultimately elected not to escalate the situation, a move Trump called "very smart." Stupid Signym, do you understand the contradiction between what Flynn told the FBI and what Flynn actually did on the phone?

Though he admitted to violating lobbying laws by failing to register as a foreign agent on behalf of Turkey for hundreds of thousands of dollars of consulting work, Flynn was not charged for those crimes and has attempted to receive leniency from the Mueller investigation by offering extensive cooperation. Two of his former business associates have now been indicted for their work on Turkey.Signym, you're a dimwit and a Russian Troll.

www.axios.com/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-kislyak-russia-turkey-8d185a76
-980c-4d6b-8fe6-daa712b3da78.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECONDRATE, being a rich guy, has no issues spending money on private investigators. He knows for a fact that I'm not a "Russian troll".

But THUGR, being the idiot that he is, believes people who lie to him.

---

It would be so sad it you were who you claimed to be, but if you are a Russian Troll at least you are being paid to serve your country. Be proud, Comrade Troll Signym, because the alternative is that you are Ms. Stupid from California.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECONDRATE, being a rich guy, has no issues spending money on private investigators. He knows for a fact that I'm not a "Russian troll".

But THUGR, being the idiot that he is, believes people who lie to him.

---

It would be so sad it you were who you claimed to be, but if you are a Russian Troll at least you are being paid to serve your country. Be proud, Comrade Troll Signym, because the alternative is that you are Ms. Stupid from California.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Has anyone seen anything other than a snippet of the transcript between Kislyak and Flynn?
No?
Because I guarantee, if there had been a long, extended conversation about sanctions between the two instead of a fragment of a sentence, it would have been leaked to the press. What appears so far seems to have been an isolated throwaway in a conversation about other things, not the topic of the conversation itself.

Has anyone seen the original report that the FIB wrote immediately after "interviewing" Flynn?
No?
Because if they had, they would have seen exculpatory evidence right in it.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY:
Has anyone seen anything other than a snippet of the transcript between Kislyak and Flynn?
No?
Because I guarantee, if there had been a long, extended conversation about sanctions between the two instead of a fragment of a sentence, it would have been leaked to the press. What appears so far seems to have been an isolated throwaway in a conversation about other things, not the topic of the conversation itself.

Has anyone seen the original report that the FIB wrote immediately after "interviewing" Flynn?
No?
Because if they had, they would have seen exculpatory evidence right in it.

SHITSTAIN: You missed the entire point Mueller was making: Flynn would be charged with a minor crime in exchange for his cooperation. Nixon had a henchman, Anna Chennault, much like Flynn, who could have been charged with a minor crime. See the article: "Did Nixon Commit Treason in 1968? What The New LBJ Tapes Reveal."
http://hnn.us/articles/60446.html
In the end, no one was held accountable for actions that Johnson had labeled “treason.”

Nobody will be held accountable in the Trump administration, either, if Trump and Barr get their way. A few got jail, Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen, for tax cheating, not for Russian interference with an election.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Er.... maybe because they had NOTHING to do with "Russian interference" in ... anything?

You're insane, SECOND. I don't know what drove you crazy, but you're a full-blown pathological liar and nutcase. You want people to be prosecuted and jailed for crimes they haven't committed, for crimes they haven't even been tried for. And you lie, and lie, and lie ....

Go peddle your lies in some other thread. You're just as big a nutbag as PN ever was.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
There are three people on this board who know that you're a big fat liar, SECOND, and you're one of them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
There are three people on this board who know that you're a big fat liar, SECOND, and you're one of them. The fact that you would continue to post bald-faced lies without a hint of shame tells me that you're a morally twisted fuck who will do or post anything in your "war" against .... whoever the hell you think you're at war with.

I'm not getting my facts wrong, you're the one misrepresenting them, as usual. I'm not interested in "freeing Flynn", I've always been about finding out the truth and looking for evidence.

You? Not so much. We've all seen you post so much blather, hyperbole, and lies I wonder if anyone reads your posts anymore. I barely bother for the most part.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So NOW you're supporting the TRUMP DOJ and William Barr?

Like I said: You're a twisted fuck. You'll contradict yourself from post to post because your brain is warped. Maybe you need to see a shrink.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Second is nothing if not inconsistent.


Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
...and too articulate to hide your stupidity.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHITSTAIN:
Barr dropped the case because Trump ordered him to. It's right in the government's brief, without saying "Trump", but rather saying "Executive":

That motion represents the authoritative position of the Executive and provides three alternative grounds for the dismissal: first, in the Executive’s assessment, the interests of justice do not support continuing the prosecution: second, based on the Executive’s legal analysis and assessment of the strength of the case, proving materiality to a jury' beyond a reasonable doubt would be difficult: and third, based on the Executive’s legal analysis and assessment of the strength of the case, proving willful falsity to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt would be difficult.
www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
...and too articulate to hide your stupidity.

---

BTW... the word you're grasping for is inarticulate, retard.


Swing and a miss...

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
...and too articulate to hide your stupidity.

---

BTW... the word you're grasping for is inarticulate, retard.


Swing and a miss...

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

The point is that you talk too much, 6ix, but your brain is too slow to keep pace with your mouth. You are overly articulate. Also called diarrhea of the mouth.

---

Quote:

---

Appeals Court Orders Flynn Judge To Dismiss Case

In a major victory for Michael Flynn, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has ordered Judge Emmet Sullivan to grant the Justice Department's request to dismiss the case against the former Trump National Security Adviser.

"Upon consideration of the emergency petition for a writ of mandamus, the responses thereto, and the reply, the briefs of amici curiae in support of the parties, and the argument by counsel, it is ORDERED that Flynn's petition for a writ of mandamus be granted in part; the District Court is directed to grant the government's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss; and the District Court's order appointing an amicus is hereby vacated as moot, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date," reads the order.

Appeals court orders Flynn judge to grant dismissal of the case pic.twitter.com/MmWSDrzHCh
— kadhim (^?^)? (@kadhim) June 24, 2020

In their decision, the appeals court wrote: "Decisions to dismiss pending criminal charges - no less than decisions to initiate charges and to identify which charges to bring - lie squarely within the ken of prosecutorial discretion.

The Judiciary's role under Rule 48 is thus confined to "extremely limited circumstances in extraordinary cases."

---

Quote:

---

Hence, no dice for Judge Sullivan.

Great! Appeals Court Upholds Justice Departments Request To Drop Criminal Case Against General Michael Flynn!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 24, 2020

Flynn pleaded guilty in December 2017 to lying to the FBI about his conversations with former Russian Ambassador to the US, Sergey Kislyak, during the presidential transition following the 2016 US election. He later withdrew his plea after securing new legal counsel, while evidence emerged which revealed the FBI had laid a 'perjury trap' - despite the fact that the agents who interviewed him in January, 2017 said they thought he was telling the truth. Agents persisted hunting Flynn despite the FBI's recommendation to close the case.

Once the FBI's malfeasance was uncovered, the Justice Department moved to dismiss the case after Attorney General William Barr tapped an outside prosecutor to examine the FBI's conduct. Judge Sullivan rejected the DOJ's request - instead calling on an outside lawyer to make arguments against the DOJ's move to drop the case.

Shortly before the DOJ move to dismiss, former Mueller prosecutor Brandon Van Grack suddenly withdrew from the case (and others). Flynn's new attorney, Sidney Powell, said that government documents revealed "further evidence of misconduct by Mr. Van Grack specifically."

Sullivan urged the federal appeals court to also reject Flynn's bid to bring an end to the case, which has now ruled against the judge.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Justice is served.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The dissenting judge, Wilkins, has not weighed in on the merits of the case and whether Flynn is guilty of perjury in addition to lying to the FIB (as the prosecutorial amicus Gleeson opined) but on whether the Appeals Court panel gave sufficient time for the lower court to issue its own ruling.

He did not opine as to what the final outcome of that ruling might be.

Judges are like umpires: they don't decide who should win or lose a case, and they definitely don't bring in a new pitcher or hitter if they don't like the way the game is going ... which is exactly what Emmett Sullivan did.

The majority of judges appeared to be responding to Sullivan's gross overstepping of his authority, and the appeals panel's objecting judge appears to concerned about timing.

I'm not sure what the resolution would be, because if Sullivan decided to drag the case out and delay his ruling indefinitely, then what? Maybe the appeals panel should have directed Sullivan to issue a ruling by date certain; then they could have ensured that all of the lower court steps were completed before issuing their own ruling? The Flynn's lawyer would have appealed the ruling (if unfavorable) and THEN the appeals panel would have issued theirs? That seems to be the remedy that Wilkins would opt for: adding two more steps to the process.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND: blah blah blah ... TRUMP ... blah blah blah

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Justice is served.

I read a random headline a week or so ago that said that Barr said that investigations will be completed by the end of summer.

Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Appeals Court Orders Flynn Judge To Dismiss Case

In a major victory for Michael Flynn, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has ordered Judge Emmet Sullivan to grant the Justice Department's request to dismiss the case against the former Trump National Security Adviser.

"Upon consideration of the emergency petition for a writ of mandamus, the responses thereto, and the reply, the briefs of amici curiae in support of the parties, and the argument by counsel, it is ORDERED that Flynn's petition for a writ of mandamus be granted in part; the District Court is directed to grant the government's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss; and the District Court's order appointing an amicus is hereby vacated as moot, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date," reads the order.

Appeals court orders Flynn judge to grant dismissal of the case pic.twitter.com/MmWSDrzHCh
— kadhim (^?^)? (@kadhim) June 24, 2020

In their decision, the appeals court wrote: "Decisions to dismiss pending criminal charges - no less than decisions to initiate charges and to identify which charges to bring - lie squarely within the ken of prosecutorial discretion.

The Judiciary's role under Rule 48 is thus confined to "extremely limited circumstances in extraordinary cases."

---

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Hence, no dice for Judge Sullivan.

Great! Appeals Court Upholds Justice Departments Request To Drop Criminal Case Against General Michael Flynn!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 24, 2020

Flynn pleaded guilty in December 2017 to lying to the FBI about his conversations with former Russian Ambassador to the US, Sergey Kislyak, during the presidential transition following the 2016 US election. He later withdrew his plea after securing new legal counsel, while evidence emerged which revealed the FBI had laid a 'perjury trap' - despite the fact that the agents who interviewed him in January, 2017 said they thought he was telling the truth. Agents persisted hunting Flynn despite the FBI's recommendation to close the case.

Once the FBI's malfeasance was uncovered, the Justice Department moved to dismiss the case after Attorney General William Barr tapped an outside prosecutor to examine the FBI's conduct. Judge Sullivan rejected the DOJ's request - instead calling on an outside lawyer to make arguments against the DOJ's move to drop the case.

Shortly before the DOJ move to dismiss, former Mueller prosecutor Brandon Van Grack suddenly withdrew from the case (and others). Flynn's new attorney, Sidney Powell, said that government documents revealed "further evidence of misconduct by Mr. Van Grack specifically."

Sullivan urged the federal appeals court to also reject Flynn's bid to bring an end to the case, which has now ruled against the judge.

---

Here is a more in-depth story
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-24/u-s-appeals-court-o
rders-judge-to-dismiss-flynn-case

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND: blah blah blah ... TRUMP ... blah blah blah

---

I supppose the majority judges must be fairly certain of their ruling, because Sullivan himself has the right to appeal, all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Deep State complaining about Deep Stating not being as easy it was to Deep State before Trump got elected.

*yawn*

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND: blah blah blah... TRUMP! ... blah blah blah

---

Quote:

---

As I explained last week, the Fokker precedent demands the district court grant the government’s motion to dismiss the criminal charge against Flynn, because in Fokker, the court held that “decisions to dismiss pending criminal charges — no less than decisions to initiate charges and to identify which charges to bring — lie squarely within the ken of prosecutorial discretion.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND: blah blah blah... TRUMP! ... blah blah blah

---

Like I already posted, the majority opinion must be pretty confident because their decision has the right to be appealed. The first step would be asking for a review of the decision by all nine judges of the Appeals Court (en banc review).

It depends on whether Judge Sullivan and pseudo-prosecutor Gleeson think there is any hope in carrying their fight further.

An interesting point, and one that the ever-deepstate-compliant M$M failed to mention, is the reasoning by the majority judges. They didn't reach a decision based on feelz but on previous rulings, in this (literally) case the Fokker decision, which specifically maintained the privilege of prosecution (or not) with the DOJ prosecutors. In Fokker v. US,

Quote:

---

As I explained last week, the Fokker precedent demands the district court grant the government’s motion to dismiss the criminal charge against Flynn, because in Fokker, the court held that “decisions to dismiss pending criminal charges — no less than decisions to initiate charges and to identify which charges to bring — lie squarely within the ken of prosecutorial discretion.”

---

The Fokker decision was written by Chief Judge Srinivasan, an OBAMA appointee, so you can hardly claim political bias.

Here is an excellent summary and legal discussion of Flynn's case, which is where I got the quote
https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/22/appeals-court-order-in-michael-fl
ynn-case-bodes-well-for-him-poorly-for-judge-sullivan/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well, AS I ALREADY POSTED TWICE BEFORE, this decision is subject to appeal. IF the appellant feels they have a leg to stand on, they will appeal. If not, they won't.

But keep on beating this dead horse!

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

---

Quote:

---

The secret plot to depose Trump
Friday, June 12, 2020 3:59 PM
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Judges are NOT to create arguments on their own, but must solely rule on arguments presented before them, according to 2 recent Supreme Court rulings.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markchenoweth/2020/05/14/judge-sullivan-d
isregards-two-controlling-precedents-by-appointing-amicus-in-flynn-case/#7cbbc3ce6f0a

---

Quote:

---

One week ago, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 9-0 decision, authored by Justice Ginsburg, that took judges to task for similar amicus antics. Her opinion for the Court in U.S. v. Sineneng-Smith upbraided the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for violating a basic aspect of legal proceedings called the “party presentation principle.” In a nutshell, this concept dictates that judges must decide the case as presented by the parties before them. They are not to go out questing for dragons to slay (or issues to tackle) that the parties have not brought before them. As J. Ginsburg put it: “[C]ourts are essentially passive instruments of government … They ‘do not, or should not, sally forth each day looking for wrongs to right. [They] wait for cases to come to [them], and when [cases arise, courts] normally decide only questions presented by the parties.”

Four years ago, in a precedent even more squarely on point, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (per J. Srinivasan) granted mandamus against a different D.C. district court judge for refusing a government charging decision. J. Sullivan seems poised to ignore the lessons from that higher court ruling, too.

In U.S. v. Fokker Servs. B.V., which I first wrote about for Forbes.com here, the district judge was overturned via an extraordinary writ of mandamus. That means that the government (and Fokker) went directly to the court of appeals and persuaded it to intervene and put a stop to the unlawful conduct of the trial judge. Oddly, J. Sullivan’s Minute Order on amicus briefs in Flynn cites the Fokker precedent to support appointing amicus curiae in a criminal case. But he neglects to mention that mandamus was granted against the district court judge in that case! Moreover, appointing amicus to represent a lower court’s view that neither party will defend (as happened on appeal in Fokker) is far different from appointing amicus in trial court to represent an alternative prosecutor’s view of the case.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Seriously. How many times does this dipshit type up the word Trump everyday?

I don't even want to know how many times he thinks about Trump daily.

Deranged.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well, AS I ALREADY POSTED TWICE BEFORE, this decision is subject to appeal. IF the appellant feels they have a leg to stand on, they will appeal. If not, they won't.

But keep on beating this dead horse!

---