Popular Post Nyezhov Posted January 16, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 16, 2020 9 hours ago, heybruce said: What evidence do you have of corruption in Flynn's case? I think thats pretty well set forth in his lawyers various motions. They are available on line. But hey, its OK, its Trump, by all means fair and foul, right? We'll ya'll who have no concern, keep in mind, that there but for the grace of god go any of us who irritate .gov. Fundamental fairness in criminal proceedings is the backbone of our nation, no matter whos ox is being gored. If you read the motions, you should be concerned, no matter what your politics. So I reckon that now Ill get the usual smilies, or arguing responses from folks who I ignore always, but thats OK. I am a lot of things, but I strive every day not to be a hypocrite in criminal matters. Unfairness is unfairness no matter who is being mistreated. Remember, no one is above the law. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolboy Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, Nyezhov said: I think thats pretty well set forth in his lawyers various motions. They are available on line. But hey, its OK, its Trump, by all means fair and foul, right? We'll ya'll who have no concern, keep in mind, that there but for the grace of god go any of us who irritate .gov. Fundamental fairness in criminal proceedings is the backbone of our nation, no matter whos ox is being gored. If you read the motions, you should be concerned, no matter what your politics. So I reckon that now Ill get the usual smilies, or arguing responses from folks who I ignore always, but thats OK. I am a lot of things, but I strive every day not to be a hypocrite in criminal matters. Unfairness is unfairness no matter who is being mistreated. Remember, no one is above the law. What makes comments like this ridiculous is that Emmet Sullivan, the judge in this case, is known for being particularly hard on prosecutorial overreach. Judge in Flynn Case Has Frequently Faulted the Government His wariness of government lawyers was reflected in an op-ed he wrote in The Wall Street Journal last year, commending New York state courts for requiring that trial judges issue orders in criminal proceedings notifying prosecutors of their obligations to turn over favorable evidence to the defense, known as a Brady order. Judge Sullivan now issues such orders in all of his cases, as he did when he was assigned the Flynn matter. “My wake-up call to the importance of Brady orders came when I presided over the deeply flawed trial of Ted Stevens,” Judge Sullivan wrote in the opinion piece, adding that “judges have a responsibility to take action against unethical prosecutors.” https://www.wsj.com/articles/judge-in-flynn-case-has-frequently-faulted-the-government-11545172349 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post heybruce Posted January 16, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 16, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Nyezhov said: I think thats pretty well set forth in his lawyers various motions. They are available on line. But hey, its OK, its Trump, by all means fair and foul, right? We'll ya'll who have no concern, keep in mind, that there but for the grace of god go any of us who irritate .gov. Fundamental fairness in criminal proceedings is the backbone of our nation, no matter whos ox is being gored. If you read the motions, you should be concerned, no matter what your politics. So I reckon that now Ill get the usual smilies, or arguing responses from folks who I ignore always, but thats OK. I am a lot of things, but I strive every day not to be a hypocrite in criminal matters. Unfairness is unfairness no matter who is being mistreated. Remember, no one is above the law. Funny that you edited out the part of my post " Are you claiming the Flynn did not ' "willfully and knowingly" making "false, fictitious and fraudulent statements" to the FBI regarding conversations with Russia's ambassador. '? https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/01/politics/michael-flynn-court-filing/index.html " I assume you don't want to answer that one. I checked online, I found no credible source that showed any government corruption that was supported by evidence. Why don't you provide a link? Until the judge, who knows much more about law and this case than you or I, rules there was prosecutorial misconduct, there is no misconduct. No ruling of misconduct so far. In view of the fact that Flynn's lawyers have invoked the deep state defense, I'd say they are throwing out any BS they can think of and hoping something will stick. But hey, Trump can do no wrong, and neither can the criminals he surrounds himself with, right? Edited January 16, 2020 by heybruce 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 On 1/15/2020 at 1:15 PM, Boon Mee said: It was a setup to begin with. Either plead guilty or we're coming for your family. The FBI and Justice Department Obama holdovers are massively corrupt. Of course Trump and his minions are cleaner than fresh snow. ???? ???? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lacessit Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 18 hours ago, CaptRon2 said: I am assuming you have a little more evidence in order to be accusing the President of being corrupt? Bankruptcy is perfectly legal and a common business practice, you are 100% incorrect in your statement he is the only US President to not show his income tax returns, and he is not legally required to do so. You say he cheats at golf? Well hell why not call Adam or Nancy, that might be a stronger case for impeachment then the one they are about to have laughed out of the Senate. You tossed out the term corruption and have not produced any proof, typical leftist BS! Your opinion is noted, as is your political sentiment. Next time I flush my toilet, they'll be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lacessit Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 18 hours ago, Nyezhov said: Well it would need to go to the Court of Appeals first, and yes, Im sure he waived his appeal rights at the allocution absent excessive sentencing, but if he alleges a constitutional violation, which he has or will, he can skirt that. I think the Court had a variation of that question in the recent case of Class v. United States. A lot of ifs, buts and maybes. So he or his lawyer might be saying if the exculpatory evidence had been presented beforehand, he would take the Fifth? Or plead not guilty? Fruit of the poisonous tree? A bit off topic, I once did an environmental audit of a steel plant in California. We Aussies have the state EPA, that's it. This facility sent the two of us dizzy - Chino Basin Water Authority, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Federal EPA, Sacramento something and another one I can't remember. Have you guys ever thought you have too many lawyers? Help me out here, I'm an alien from another planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolboy Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, Nyezhov said: I think thats pretty well set forth in his lawyers various motions. They are available on line. Honorable people back up their claims. They don't ask others to do it for them. Edited January 16, 2020 by bristolboy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyezhov Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 4 hours ago, Lacessit said: Have you guys ever thought you have too many lawyers? Hell yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyezhov Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 6 hours ago, heybruce said: I assume you don't want to answer that one. No its immaterial. But the FBI surely didnt think he was lying did they? But hey, I ate so much Taco Bell Im gonna puke. See you at the next motion or decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 1 hour ago, Nyezhov said: No its immaterial. But the FBI surely didnt think he was lying did they? But hey, I ate so much Taco Bell Im gonna puke. See you at the next motion or decision. Once again, you edited my post down to one line you thought you had an answer to, then did a bad job of replying. You think the crime Flynn committed is immaterial. No further comment needed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langsuan Man Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 What everyone so conveniently likes to forget is that you can refuse to talk to the FBI But if you do talk to them you better tell the truth Flynn lied and admitted it, enough said 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now