Judge Sullivan Scrambles For A Lifeline To Bail HIMSELF Out Of Dropped Flynn Case

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

NO REASONABLE MIND COULD CONCLUDE that such evidence does NOT help the defense. NONE!!!

Explain how it helps the defense.

Would it cause in the minds of a jury to have the slightest doubt about the case?

That, plus other evidence, plus some text messages, plus the call transcript itself, etc.

Defenses are rarely dependent on one single piece of evidence. Defendants are entitled to present it all, even if it slightly discredits the prosecution's case.

Do you disagree?
.
/

 

[colfax_m]

Would it cause in the minds of a jury to have the slightest doubt about the case?

Why are you asking me?
I would like to know why you think it’s exculpatory. Can you explain how?

 

[meaner gene]

Apparently everyone who pleads innocent and then gets convicted has committed perjury.

FBI policy is not to charge people with lying to them by claiming they're innocent.

Perjury usually isn't pursued, even in civil cases. But it is what is behind keeping either side of a case from constantly changing their arguments, in an attempt to throw it at the wall and see what sticks.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Would it cause in the minds of a jury to have the slightest doubt about the case?

Why are you asking me?
I would like to know why you think it’s exculpatory. Can you explain how?

I already did....several times.

Here it is again.

One of the elements of the crime is "willfully or knowingly." This is the intent element.

Flynn can present evidence that he did not intend to lie to investigators.

Let's start here. Do you disagree???? Is that statement true?

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Perjury usually isn't pursued

NEVER pursued. EVER!!!!

.

 

[colfax_m]

Would it cause in the minds of a jury to have the slightest doubt about the case?

Why are you asking me?
I would like to know why you think it’s exculpatory. Can you explain how?

I already did....several times.

Here it is again.

One of the elements of the crime is "willfully or knowingly." This is the intent element.

Flynn can present evidence that he did not intend to lie to investigators.

Let's start here. Do you disagree???? Is that statement true?

.

Not as far as I can tell but maybe there’s something I’m not seeing. How does that conversation that he was unaware of demonstrate he as not intending to lie?

 

[meaner gene]

I know what perjury is. What is the specific perjury charge here

That Flynn admitted he lied to the FBI (and other crimes) under penalty of perjury, and then he took it back. (actually made a diametric claim)

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Would it cause in the minds of a jury to have the slightest doubt about the case?

Why are you asking me?
I would like to know why you think it’s exculpatory. Can you explain how?

I already did....several times.

Here it is again.

One of the elements of the crime is "willfully or knowingly." This is the intent element.

Flynn can present evidence that he did not intend to lie to investigators.

Let's start here. Do you disagree???? Is that statement true?

.

Not as far as I can tell but maybe there’s something I’m not seeing. How does that conversation that he was unaware of demonstrate he as not intending to lie?

It demonstrates that they went into the meeting trying to trap him. And they did. He was not trying to lie. He just could not remember what they discussed, so the way they asked the questions caused him to think that he had not talked about certain topics on a particular call.

He was cooperating. He didn't willfully or knowingly lie to them. It was all a bunch of confusion over his memory over thousands of conversations a guy like Flynn likely would have.

Are you telling me that you cannot comprehend how this would help the defense?

I don't give a rat fuck if your partisan confirmation bias is saying "no." Objectively, you cannot see how this weakens the prosecution's proof as to Flynn's intent?

.

 

[meaner gene]

Flynn fully intended to lie.
Flynn lied first to Mike Pence, he lied to Rance Priebus, and then he lied to the FBI.

You don't tell the same lie three different times, if you didn't intend to.

You don't seem to get it. You're not even close to the proper standard for Brady evidence.

The judge should not give a fuck about what he believes Flynn intended.

A defendant is allowed to review and present all evidence that casts doubt on the prosecution's case.

How can Flynn claim he did not intend to lie, if he did so three times, to three different people. Twice where there was no legal sanction against it, and once when there was.

Prior behavior is not evidence of future crimes, but it is proof of state of mind, and intent.

 

[colfax_m]

Would it cause in the minds of a jury to have the slightest doubt about the case?

Why are you asking me?
I would like to know why you think it’s exculpatory. Can you explain how?

I already did....several times.

Here it is again.

One of the elements of the crime is "willfully or knowingly." This is the intent element.

Flynn can present evidence that he did not intend to lie to investigators.

Let's start here. Do you disagree???? Is that statement true?

.

Not as far as I can tell but maybe there’s something I’m not seeing. How does that conversation that he was unaware of demonstrate he as not intending to lie?

It demonstrates that they went into the meeting trying to trap him. And they did. He was not trying to lie. He just could not remember what they discussed, so the way they asked the questions caused him to think that he had not talked about certain topics on a particular call.

He was cooperating. He didn't willfully or knowingly lie to them. It was all a bunch of confusion over his memory over thousands of conversations a guy like Flynn likely would have.

Are you telling me that you cannot comprehend how this would help the defense?

I don't give a rat fuck if your partisan confirmation bias is saying "no." Objectively, you cannot see how this weakens the prosecution's proof as to Flynn's intent?

.

How could the FBI ask him questions in a way to cause him to respond that way?

All of these explanations rely on the interview going down in a way that we know it didn’t.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I know what perjury is. What is the specific perjury charge here

That Flynn admitted he lied to the FBI (and other crimes) under penalty of perjury, and then he took it back. (actually made a diametric claim)

...as does ANY criminal defendant who wants to withdraw his plea.

Jesus.

.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yeah...but who has the right to press charges?
Perjury falls under the purview of prosecutorial-discretion.....and none of the prosecutors want to press charges.
The only asshole wanting to press charges is a corrupt Obama judge.
Obama seems to know alot of these shitheads.

The judge can hold Flynn in criminal contempt for perjury.

Yeah someone explain the rationale behind the perjury claim, it cannot be as bizarre as I think it is

Apparently everyone who pleads innocent and then gets convicted has committed perjury.

Yep.....

 

[meaner gene]

They would be charging him for answering the question "are you pleading guilty because you are guilty and for no other reason" and then changing his plea.

People are allowed to change their plea from innocent to guilty without being charged with perjury. But Flynn said he was guilty, was given a chance to change his mind, and did not. He again confirmed his guilt in front of the judge. Flynn changed his mind, not based on his innocence, but that the judge took the crime more seriously than Flynn thought he would.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

How could the FBI ask him questions in a way to cause him to respond that way?

All of these explanations rely on the interview going down in a way that we know it didn’t.

And, the prosecution can argue that and make that case.

But, no. YOU want to prevent Frynn from mounting ANY defense. You want the deck so far staked in the prosecution's favor that Flynn gets NO defense whatsoever.

Am I a exposing you as a partisan hack yet?

.

 

[mudwhistle]

Would it cause in the minds of a jury to have the slightest doubt about the case?

Why are you asking me?
I would like to know why you think it’s exculpatory. Can you explain how?

I already did....several times.

Here it is again.

One of the elements of the crime is "willfully or knowingly." This is the intent element.

Flynn can present evidence that he did not intend to lie to investigators.

Let's start here. Do you disagree???? Is that statement true?

.

Not as far as I can tell but maybe there’s something I’m not seeing. How does that conversation that he was unaware of demonstrate he as not intending to lie?

It demonstrates that they went into the meeting trying to trap him. And they did. He was not trying to lie. He just could not remember what they discussed, so the way they asked the questions caused him to think that he had not talked about certain topics on a particular call.

He was cooperating. He didn't willfully or knowingly lie to them. It was all a bunch of confusion over his memory over thousands of conversations a guy like Flynn likely would have.

Are you telling me that you cannot comprehend how this would help the defense?

I don't give a rat fuck if your partisan confirmation bias is saying "no." Objectively, you cannot see how this weakens the prosecution's proof as to Flynn's intent?

.

How could the FBI ask him questions in a way to cause him to respond that way?

All of these explanations rely on the interview going down in a way that we know it didn’t.

I don't think it was questions....more like THREATS.

The tools that were running the Mueller Investigation were well known for threatening charges to get people to flip.
They were able to do it with some smalltime lawyer that used to work for Trump over a hooker who was blackmailing Trump.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

They would be charging him for answering the question "are you pleading guilty because you are guilty and for no other reason" and then changing his plea.

People are allowed to change their plea from innocent to guilty without being charged with perjury. But Flynn said he was guilty, was given a chance to change his mind, and did not. He again confirmed his guilt in front of the judge. Flynn changed his mind, not based on his innocence, but that the judge took the crime more seriously than Flynn thought he would.

Are you telling me that any defendant who withdraws a guilty plea after entering the plea and answering the judge's question in the affirmative that he pleading guilty because he is guilty and for no other reason, should be prosecuted for perjury? Is that you position?

(this is a huge trap)

.

 

[bripat9643]

Apparently everyone who pleads innocent and then gets convicted has committed perjury.

FBI policy is not to charge people with lying to them by claiming they're innocent.

Perjury usually isn't pursued, even in civil cases. But it is what is behind keeping either side of a case from constantly changing their arguments, in an attempt to throw it at the wall and see what sticks.

Plead not guilty is not the same thing as telling the FBi you are innocent, moron. Flynn didn't even do the later. He never even knew he was being investigated because Comey lied to him.

 

[bripat9643]

They would be charging him for answering the question "are you pleading guilty because you are guilty and for no other reason" and then changing his plea.

People are allowed to change their plea from innocent to guilty without being charged with perjury. But Flynn said he was guilty, was given a chance to change his mind, and did not. He again confirmed his guilt in front of the judge. Flynn changed his mind, not based on his innocence, but that the judge took the crime more seriously than Flynn thought he would.

Are you telling me that any defendant who withdraws a guilty plea after entering the plea and answering the judge's question in the affirmative that he pleading guilty because he is guilty and for no other reason, should be prosecuted for perjury? Is that you position?

(this is a huge trap)

.

The consequent of that is that pleading innocent and then being convicted makes you guilty of perjury, and no one has ever even been charged with that.

 

[meaner gene]

I know what perjury is. What is the specific perjury charge here

That Flynn admitted he lied to the FBI (and other crimes) under penalty of perjury, and then he took it back. (actually made a diametric claim)

...as does ANY criminal defendant who wants to withdraw his plea.

Jesus.

.

The difference is Flynn is trying to withdraw his plea AFTER CONVICTION.

 

[Nostra]

Apples and Oranges.
You're confusing a criminal investigation with transposing dialog during communications. And the person that is transposing the transcripts needs to hear the conversation personally either live or by recording. Page altered the 302 without doing either. Apples and oranges.

Neither Trumps phone call or Flynns interview were recorded. The 302 and the transcript came from people hearing it and taking notes, putting the notes together to recreate what was said.

Both are edited by others, but one requires the interviewer "sign off" on the changes, the other does not.

Really? Page was there for the perjury trap?