Sidney powell

[Faun]

Wow okay, you’re clearly ignorant to this entire process. Whose there to argue against or for the defendant sentence? Sentencing is a part of the prosecutorial process. It’s a whooooole other part. It especially gets complicated when turning someone, how do you keep the sword of Damocles over them while still getting them to cooperate and get material info(not that the FBI or mueller actually care about anything material). What happens if any victims decide they want to appear at sentencing and give their testimony on what they think the judge should give. And of course the defense had to look out for their client in all of this arguing for the best sentence, the best deal, and make sure their client isn’t getting royally screwed over. And then the judge has to agree to it all. Why the fuck do you people think just make up law as you go? You didn’t see a sentencing hearing on SVU so I guess they’re just whatever you imagine them to be? This is what I’ve been saying, how does judge Sullivan continue to prosecute a case when both the prosecution and the defense agree to drop charges? Are you starting to understand how much of a circus this was. Who the fuck is judge Sullivan going to work a deal out with??? There is no prosecution? Flynn took a plea deal in turn for his cooperation. Sullivan wanted to place himself as the prosecution and I guess just lay out the terms of flynns cooperation with the non participating DOJ? He just wasn’t going to listen to anything Flynn’s attorney had to say on the sentencing? *Insert circus music*. Sentencing is like the 4th quarter of the game. And Sullivan as the ref decided he wanted to make Flynn continue to play by himself, and flag him for intentional grounding whenever he threw the ball because there was no receiver in the area, when the rest of both teams were already on the plane headed home. *insert circus music*.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. Sentencing is 100% within the jurisdiction of the court. A prosecutor can request or suggest a sentence, but the ultimate decision comes from the court; which can consider or ignore whatever the prosecution asks for.

A defendant can even cut a deal with prosecutors in exchange for a lesser sentence; but such a deal is not binding on the court. And while judges may typically consider any such deal upon sentencing, they can totally ignore the deal if they so choose.

 

[lennypartiv]

“Work out” sentencing?

You make it sound like it’s a negotiation. It’s not. It’s the judge’s decision. The DoJ is completely unnecessary.

The DoJ plays the role of the prosecution. They wanted to drop the charges.

 

[Lesh]

DOJ dropped charges. So it did. This is what I’m talking about folks.

The DOJ did NOT drop charges

 

[Lesh]

.

 

[Lesh]

The DoJ plays the role of the prosecution. They wanted to drop the charges.

Then why didn't they?

 

[colfax_m]

Wow okay, you’re clearly ignorant to this entire process. Whose there to argue against or for the defendant sentence? Sentencing is a part of the prosecutorial process. It’s a whooooole other part. It especially gets complicated when turning someone, how do you keep the sword of Damocles over them while still getting them to cooperate and get material info(not that the FBI or mueller actually care about anything material). What happens if any victims decide they want to appear at sentencing and give their testimony on what they think the judge should give. And of course the defense had to look out for their client in all of this arguing for the best sentence, the best deal, and make sure their client isn’t getting royally screwed over. And then the judge has to agree to it all. Why the fuck do you people think just make up law as you go? You didn’t see a sentencing hearing on SVU so I guess they’re just whatever you imagine them to be? This is what I’ve been saying, how does judge Sullivan continue to prosecute a case when both the prosecution and the defense agree to drop charges? Are you starting to understand how much of a circus this was. Who the fuck is judge Sullivan going to work a deal out with??? There is no prosecution? Flynn took a plea deal in turn for his cooperation. Sullivan wanted to place himself as the prosecution and I guess just lay out the terms of flynns cooperation with the non participating DOJ? He just wasn’t going to listen to anything Flynn’s attorney had to say on the sentencing? *Insert circus music*. Sentencing is like the 4th quarter of the game. And Sullivan as the ref decided he wanted to make Flynn continue to play by himself, and flag him for intentional grounding whenever he threw the ball because there was no receiver in the area, when the rest of both teams were already on the plane headed home. *insert circus music*.

The prosecution had already submitted their sentencing recommendation before the Trump lackey got in there and attempted to corruptly get the loyal soldier off. However, the judge is perfectly capable of making a sentence without the prosecution making a recommendation. I believe they did so when the Trump lackeys withdrew the recommendation for Roger Stone.

The DoJ is not trying to "turn" Flynn. That's not an issue. Flynn participated for a year (maybe 2). Then he stopped participating. The judge knows this. Participation from Flynn is no longer an issue.

There are no victims to appear at sentencing.

The defense is more than welcome to advocate for their client. That has nothing to do with it.

Sullivan isn't going to "work a deal" with anyone. He's going to sentence the guilty party. It's not a deal. It's the judge making a ruling.

The guilty plea from Flynn is still in effect. The judge knows everything he needs to know to make a sentence.

 

[colfax_m]

A. Where the hell does it say Sullivan had the power to continue a prosecution in which the prosecution is no longer participating??? It’s one of the most powerful checks the executive branch has outside of the veto. That’s like saying legislators can only draft law as long as no other judge wants to draft that law. That’s insane. It’s never happened before because it would be insane for any judge to continue continue the case. This was a circus. You cannot say that WITH a clearly coerced plea, WITH altered evidenced (evidence on which the entire case rested) with no record of alteration creating a completely obliterated COC that should’ve got the evidence thrown out, WITH secret deals going on behind the back of the client, WITH the FBI withholding pretty fucking important evidence like they filed to close the case weeks prior (clear Brady violation, investigators and prosecution turn over EVERYTHING just to avoid it) and Sullivan not only doesn’t throw the case out completely after all that, but doesn’t, at bare minimum, allow for a withdrawal of a plea??? Bullshit, no way on earth you could ever claim Sullivan was an unbiased judge. Clear as water being wet. He should’ve been disrobed, but the left turned him into an anti trump hero. And we’re supposed to go off of his “rulings”???? That’s insane. Our whole system is based off of, “there will be asshole (insert government power position here), therefore we need a check against them.” In this case, it’s an asshole judge who needs to be checked. This idea of judicial supremacy is absurd, it’s basically oligarchy on the judicial level, with political theater on the executive and legislative level. Judges are an important check, but that does not make them immune from checks on themselves. I shouldn’t even have to broach this subject. This is insane, when it comes to Flynn, the left completely forgets about criminal justice reform.

B. Asked and answered in A

C. As far as memory, now your either being dishonest, or you’re ignorant of the actual very clear science of the matter. How bad the human memory is, despite how surprising it is for lay people to hear about, has been settled science for decades. I mean fucking mentalists have been exploiting the human memory since Houdini. We’ve known it for a very long time.

As stated just before, there's no further prosecution necessary. Just sentencing. That does not require any participation from the prosecution. At all.

There are checks on the executive branch too. The check on Sullivan is the appeals court. They already ruled in favor of Sullivan to continue seeking opinions.

What's insane is ignoring that the Trump administration is playing games with the prosecution.

I disagree that the plea was coerced. I disagree that the evidence was altered. I disagree that there were secret backdoor agreements. I disagree that any exculpatory evidence was withheld. These are mere allegations from a disgraced attorney. Not findings of fact.

On the other hand, there is clear evidence that the Trump lackeys altered evidence to exculpate Flynn. They added dates to some notes to allege that a conversation occurred at a different time than it actually did.

DOJ [or Flynn's Team] Altered an Exhibit in the Mike Flynn Case to Support a False Smear of Joe Biden - emptywheel

The reason it matters that DOJ altered Peter Strzok's notes is because the annotation supports a false claim against Joe Biden.

www.emptywheel.net

 

[lennypartiv]

What's insane is ignoring that the Trump administration is playing games with the prosecution.

That's their right since they control the DOJ.

 

[colfax_m]

That's their right since they control the DOJ.

Sounds like you are cool with corruption.

 

[sakinago]

As stated just before, there's no further prosecution necessary. Just sentencing. That does not require any participation from the prosecution. At all.

There are checks on the executive branch too. The check on Sullivan is the appeals court. They already ruled in favor of Sullivan to continue seeking opinions.

What's insane is ignoring that the Trump administration is playing games with the prosecution.

I disagree that the plea was coerced. I disagree that the evidence was altered. I disagree that there were secret backdoor agreements. I disagree that any exculpatory evidence was withheld. These are mere allegations from a disgraced attorney. Not findings of fact.

On the other hand, there is clear evidence that the Trump lackeys altered evidence to exculpate Flynn. They added dates to some notes to allege that a conversation occurred at a different time than it actually did.

DOJ [or Flynn's Team] Altered an Exhibit in the Mike Flynn Case to Support a False Smear of Joe Biden - emptywheel

The reason it matters that DOJ altered Peter Strzok's notes is because the annotation supports a false claim against Joe Biden.

www.emptywheel.net

What I state are facts. The original 302 were altered plain and simple. Plus the texts between storzk and Paige confirming the alteration? The original 302 are still missing. This is admitted by the FBI. Jesus Christ you can’t disagree with facts. We’re not even getting into how dirty the FBI 302 process is. They are perjury traps themselves, and only work in the FBIs favor. There’s no reason on gods green earth why the FBI isn’t mandated to record every single interview. They fucking record everything else with surveillance. Ask yourself why they don’t record interviews? It’s the FBIs handwritten notes, during the interview. Then they “officially” file them, it could be a month later. Then it’s the word of the interviewing agents, and their notes, vs the poor guy who thought he was just helping the FBI out. The interviewee is completely at the mercy of whatever the agents write in their notes. The agents don’t write down word for word. They can’t. They’re not stenographers. They’re talking, listening, and writing at the same time. Often in short hand. They leave out a lot. Including important details, often. They may misunderstand an answer. The interviewee may misunderstand a question. The agent may not have a clue about the subject matter he’s asking about and have no clue what he’s actually asking. That’s some of the honest mistakes that can be made. They could just flat out lie (have been caught doing so often). Then they “build their case” for a year or longer, tell you what “you said” in a interview, and then threaten prosecution. It’s among the dirtiest of processes. Let’s not pretend like the FBI are “Boy Scouts”. They are COINTELPRO. Not much has changed since

10 Most Crooked and Corrupt Things the FBI Has Ever Done

Here's why trusting the FBI to defend the greater good is a terrible idea.

theantimedia.com

Threatening to go after his son unless he takes a deal is coercion, it’s literally listed as an example of a coerced plea by every fucking law blog on gods green earth. The FBI did not deny this fact either. The original attorneys did make a back door deal, this was part of the exculpatory evidence that came out. Filing to close the case isn’t exculpatory evidence, only to have it “paused” not by evidence of a new crime but because the “higher ups said so” (erasing any claims of materiality)???? Back door deals with the defendants attorneys isn’t exculpatory evidence??? Exculpatory evidence is ANYTHING THAT COULD POSSIBLY HELP THE DEFENDENTS CASE, EVEN THE TINIEST BIT. This is why you turn over EVERYTHING to the defense in discovery. You will blow the case even if the defendant is guilty as sin. This was not a “simple mistake”. This was manufacturing a crime. Something the FBI is still doing to this day, and have been for a very long time.

And the trump admin threw Flynn under the bus hella fast. There was no screwing on the trunk admins part. The screwing came solely from the FBI and Sullivan.

And no, the appellate court demanded Sullivan explain himself.

United States v. Fokker Services B.V. - Harvard Law Review

Since the Arthur Andersen prosecution in which thousands of innocent workers lost their jobs, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has increasingly turned to deferred...

harvardlawreview.org

“The D.C. Circuit subsequently curtailed these efforts in United States v. Fokker Services B.V.,5× in which it held that to preserve “the Executive’s long-settled primacy over charging,”6× a court is not authorized to reject a DPA based on a finding that the “charging decisions” and “conditions agreed to in the DPA” are inadequate.7ד

 

[colfax_m]

What I state are facts. The original 302 were altered plain and simple. Plus the texts between storzk and Paige confirming the alteration? The original 302 are still missing. This is admitted by the FBI. Jesus Christ you can’t disagree with facts. We’re not even getting into how dirty the FBI 302 process is. They are perjury traps themselves, and only work in the FBIs favor. There’s no reason on gods green earth why the FBI isn’t mandated to record every single interview. They fucking record everything else with surveillance. Ask yourself why they don’t record interviews? It’s the FBIs handwritten notes, during the interview. Then they “officially” file them, it could be a month later. Then it’s the word of the interviewing agents, and their notes, vs the poor guy who thought he was just helping the FBI out. The interviewee is completely at the mercy of whatever the agents write in their notes. The agents don’t write down word for word. They can’t. They’re not stenographers. They’re talking, listening, and writing at the same time. Often in short hand. They leave out a lot. Including important details, often. They may misunderstand an answer. The interviewee may misunderstand a question. The agent may not have a clue about the subject matter he’s asking about and have no clue what he’s actually asking. That’s some of the honest mistakes that can be made. They could just flat out lie (have been caught doing so often). Then they “build their case” for a year or longer, tell you what “you said” in a interview, and then threaten prosecution. It’s among the dirtiest of processes. Let’s not pretend like the FBI are “Boy Scouts”. They are COINTELPRO. Not much has changed since

10 Most Crooked and Corrupt Things the FBI Has Ever Done

Here's why trusting the FBI to defend the greater good is a terrible idea.

theantimedia.com

Threatening to go after his son unless he takes a deal is coercion, it’s literally listed as an example of a coerced plea by every fucking law blog on gods green earth. The FBI did not deny this fact either. The original attorneys did make a back door deal, this was part of the exculpatory evidence that came out. Filing to close the case isn’t exculpatory evidence, only to have it “paused” not by evidence of a new crime but because the “higher ups said so” (erasing any claims of materiality)???? Back door deals with the defendants attorneys isn’t exculpatory evidence??? Exculpatory evidence is ANYTHING THAT COULD POSSIBLY HELP THE DEFENDENTS CASE, EVEN THE TINIEST BIT. This is why you turn over EVERYTHING to the defense in discovery. You will blow the case even if the defendant is guilty as sin. This was not a “simple mistake”. This was manufacturing a crime. Something the FBI is still doing to this day, and have been for a very long time.

And the trump admin threw Flynn under the bus hella fast. There was no screwing on the trunk admins part. The screwing came solely from the FBI and Sullivan.

And no, the appellate court demanded Sullivan explain himself.

United States v. Fokker Services B.V. - Harvard Law Review

Since the Arthur Andersen prosecution in which thousands of innocent workers lost their jobs, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has increasingly turned to deferred...

harvardlawreview.org

“The D.C. Circuit subsequently curtailed these efforts in United States v. Fokker Services B.V.,5× in which it held that to preserve “the Executive’s long-settled primacy over charging,”6× a court is not authorized to reject a DPA based on a finding that the “charging decisions” and “conditions agreed to in the DPA” are inadequate.7ד

Most of this is made up, exaggerated or manipulated.

You keep talking about how they "altered" the "original" 302. Using the word "original" is wrong. It was a draft document. So if you wanted to be accurate and say they altered the draft 302. No fucking shit. That's what a fucking draft is. A document that is being worked on and altered. As for Paige, we have records of her alterations. They were grammatical. This entire line of argument was already put before Sullivan who reviewed the 302 and the FBI notes and stated, correctly, that there were no discrepancies.

Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show

A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.

www.lawfareblog.com

As for taking notes, sure. That's why there's two FBI agents. As for Flynn not understanding the question, that's why they asked it several times. He lied each time. They actually tried to get Flynn to tell the truth. He decided not to.

As for threatening to go after his son? Well, his son just so happened to be accused of the same crime that Flynn was with a FARA violation. If you don't want your son to be in legal jeopardy, tell you what, don't involve him in your legal schemes. That's not coercion and the court has not held that to be the case. The plea agreement was to drop the FARA violation. Since they're both accused of the same violation, it would be weird to prosecute only one of them.

Filing to close the case isn't exculpatory because it took place before the crime even occurred. I mean, how the hell could that be exculpatory? It doesn't have any relevance on whether Flynn told the lie or not.

Saying the appellate court explain what Sullivan was doing is accurate, but you should also note that the en banc review from the appellate court ruled that what Sullivan was doing was proper.

In re Flynn, 973 F.3d 74 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read In re Flynn, 973 F.3d 74, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

 

[bripat9643]

You are, as always, an idiot.

Counterintelligence | Federal Bureau of Investigation

The FBI is the lead agency for exposing, preventing, and investigating intelligence activities, including espionage, in the U.S.

www.fbi.gov

Was Al Capone a Russian agent?

 

[sakinago]

Most of this is made up, exaggerated or manipulated.

You keep talking about how they "altered" the "original" 302. Using the word "original" is wrong. It was a draft document. So if you wanted to be accurate and say they altered the draft 302. No fucking shit. That's what a fucking draft is. A document that is being worked on and altered. As for Paige, we have records of her alterations. They were grammatical. This entire line of argument was already put before Sullivan who reviewed the 302 and the FBI notes and stated, correctly, that there were no discrepancies.

Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show

A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.

www.lawfareblog.com

As for taking notes, sure. That's why there's two FBI agents. As for Flynn not understanding the question, that's why they asked it several times. He lied each time. They actually tried to get Flynn to tell the truth. He decided not to.

As for threatening to go after his son? Well, his son just so happened to be accused of the same crime that Flynn was with a FARA violation. If you don't want your son to be in legal jeopardy, tell you what, don't involve him in your legal schemes. That's not coercion and the court has not held that to be the case. The plea agreement was to drop the FARA violation. Since they're both accused of the same violation, it would be weird to prosecute only one of them.

Filing to close the case isn't exculpatory because it took place before the crime even occurred. I mean, how the hell could that be exculpatory? It doesn't have any relevance on whether Flynn told the lie or not.

Saying the appellate court explain what Sullivan was doing is accurate, but you should also note that the en banc review from the appellate court ruled that what Sullivan was doing was proper.

In re Flynn, 973 F.3d 74 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read In re Flynn, 973 F.3d 74, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

No

Most of this is made up, exaggerated or manipulated.

You keep talking about how they "altered" the "original" 302. Using the word "original" is wrong. It was a draft document. So if you wanted to be accurate and say they altered the draft 302. No fucking shit. That's what a fucking draft is. A document that is being worked on and altered. As for Paige, we have records of her alterations. They were grammatical. This entire line of argument was already put before Sullivan who reviewed the 302 and the FBI notes and stated, correctly, that there were no discrepancies.

Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show

A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.

www.lawfareblog.com

As for taking notes, sure. That's why there's two FBI agents. As for Flynn not understanding the question, that's why they asked it several times. He lied each time. They actually tried to get Flynn to tell the truth. He decided not to.

As for threatening to go after his son? Well, his son just so happened to be accused of the same crime that Flynn was with a FARA violation. If you don't want your son to be in legal jeopardy, tell you what, don't involve him in your legal schemes. That's not coercion and the court has not held that to be the case. The plea agreement was to drop the FARA violation. Since they're both accused of the same violation, it would be weird to prosecute only one of them.

Filing to close the case isn't exculpatory because it took place before the crime even occurred. I mean, how the hell could that be exculpatory? It doesn't have any relevance on whether Flynn told the lie or not.

Saying the appellate court explain what Sullivan was doing is accurate, but you should also note that the en banc review from the appellate court ruled that what Sullivan was doing was proper.

In re Flynn, 973 F.3d 74 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read In re Flynn, 973 F.3d 74, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

whoa whoa, law fare blog is a completely biased source. They have been the primary biased source of the Flynn case and mueller investigation. This is a joke. I don’t post horse shit sources like this. I just gave you salon and the Harvard law review. Law fare blog is MSNBC, but with a “lawyer” instead of Maddow. It’s rife with biased language that does not belong in any sort of publication that claims to anything pertaining to law. Here’s an example (I can do it all day with the entire piece, but it’ll be a long post), but this will do because it’s two examples back to back.
“Instead, he hired Sidney Powell—a lawyer who had been sharply critical of the Mueller investigation—and proceeded to back away from his plea and subsequent affirmation of wrongdoing before the judge, with Powell arguing that Flynn had been “ambush[ed]” by FBI agents aiming to “trap ... him into making statements they could allege as false.”
A. Of course she was critical, she’s representing Flynn and fucking half the country was critical of the mueller investigation, because it was a sham that turned up NOTHING based off of a opo research dossier and laundered Intel passed off as separate from the dossier when it fact it wasn’t, that was known to be completely bogus. That is what sparked the whole trump Russia collusion bullshit. Everyone and their mom knew it was BS, unless you watch CNN all night. People still believe there’s a fucking pee tape for Christ sake. You can lump them in with the Michelle Obama is actually a man crowd. Any and all defense attorneys will scoff at the weakness of this dossier, and any prosecutor/investigator will grimace. Of course Sydney Powell was not a fan of the mueller investigation. She smelt a flimsy case (I can’t think of a stronger word than flimsy, it’s less than flimsy), as did the other half of the country and defense attorneys across the nation. It turned out to be true. They didn’t need a strong case, they wanted a narrative, that’s exactly what this was Mc and that’s what they got. Look what it turned into Here’s the issue, why tf would you bring this up in a LAW BLOG? That’s clear bias number one. Number two is trying to pretend like Comey didn’t go on national tv and brag about setting Flynn up with a perjury trap. “We went around the normal channels so he wouldn’t have a lawyer”. THIS WAS A PERJURY TRAP. A perfectly legal and proper phone call. Part of the exculpatory evidence was the note stating the goal was to get him to lie/get fired. You can’t use the Logan act. Why was it the FBI was so interested in this phone call??? One reason. Russia. Obama admin kicked Russian diplomats out, and obviously they called the transition team to say “wtf”. There’s your narrative. Get out of here with that BS.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf
See pages 8-12.
What’s law fare blogs argument here? That the FBI all of sudden forgot how to investigate and vet sources before going to a FISA court to get expansive surveillance on the president elect??? No answer you, or law fare blog, gives to that are good ones. Nixon went down for far less, what was it, a list of political enemies to sick investigators on? This is clear Stalinist/Beria tactics of “you show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”. Letitia James anyone?

I could tear this entire article up on biased language alone. Onto the actual subject matter. Ugh. You honestly except anyone with 46 chromosomes to believe that Covington (attorneys already caught making secret deals with the prosecution) just happened to loose the most important pieces of evidences? Oh brother. And then ooopsie, we forgot to send over another 7000 emails, here’s a big ole document dump of non sense right in the middle of you reviewing discovery with a fast approaching deadline ...Law Firms are not this bad at this. Not on purpose. At best they’d get reemed out by judges in front of god and everyone in court and have no more law firm left. *insert circus music*. 90% of being an attorney is filing shit properly. That’s it.

Omg there are so many problems with this piece I can’t even cover all of them. This is atrocious. They completely gloss over giglio like it’s no big deal...yeah ignoring giglio and going after family is just “prosecutorial hardball”. LMFAO.

“Prosecutors were apparently willing to forego other charges against Flynn in exchange for his cooperation and plea to the single felony.” This is beyond atrocious. They act like the FBI did Flynn a favor here. Anyone whose been caught shoplifting knows how this works. They throw 6 bogus chargers at you that they know they’ll never get in order for you to take the plea deal for the one they think they can get you with, and they’ll “drop” the other 6. I might print this out just so I can burn it.

“To be sure, a possible criminal prosecution based on the Logan Act case was weak leverage” It’s not “weak leverage” the Logan act is a literal dead letter. The last guy charged was a Pennsylvania farmer or some shit 200 years ago. Also, it would not apply even if it wasn’t, the transition team is an official governmental body. So you could say this piece is a little bit biased, ey? I’m still skipping over a lot of BS here.

“The documents themselves don’t reveal the reason for the shift. But reporting by the New York Times provides a hint. According to the Times, the Jan. 4 decision not to close the case may have resulted from the FBI’s discovery that Flynn had spoken with Kislyak in the previous days” The FBI HAS to justify why they kept the case open. They didn’t. Had plenty of opportunity. They just forgot to document it? They just forgot to tell us when this evidence came out and they were benign lambasted for it? What this garbage fails to point out is how a highly classified unmasking of a member of the presidential transition team in a perfectly legal and proper phone call with a Russian diplomat got leaked to the NYT, of which only high levels of the Obama admin and those on crossfire razor knew of at the time...kind of a big question isn’t it? That’s information laundering clear as day if I ever saw it. Mind you, it was a perfectly legal and proper phone call, under very non suspicious circumstances. No shit kysliack called. What happened during that time? Why was this pushed by the NYT as a bombshell story?? Why was it leaked by either FBI or Obama admin??? NARRATIVE.

Blackmail risk my light brown ass...absurd. Milly can go around the duly elected presidents back as well as the state department, and strip the president of power and let China know he’ll thwart any imaginary strike that was never going to come from the most non interventionist president in my lifetime...but the FBI had to be super duper cawerfuw Flynn didn’t get blackmailed for lying to pence about a perfectly legal and above the board phone call. They just cared about the trump admin so much. Mind you, it was their bullshit summery, not the actual transcripts, they gave to pence. “It’s possible but I don’t recall” was never included in that.

“ there is nothing wrong with the bureau contemplating the closure of a case without interviewing the subject, then deciding not to close it and that an interview is appropriate, proceeding with the interview, and prosecuting the individual for lying in that interview.” Yeah except for the whole question of materiality.... you can’t divide zero by zero. “Hey, so we found out you’re not a drug dealer but you got the dates wrong on your trip to Mexico, so we’re gonna charge you with lying.” Does that sound material to a drug investigation? And “oh yeah we already had your flight records so we didn’t even need that information we asked you about and are charging you with lying.” Is that material?

“ “[T]he Court agrees with the government that there were no material changes” SULLIVAN CANNOT POSSIBLY KNOW THAT BECAUSE THEY DELETED THE ORIGINAL. THIS IS WHY YOU KEEP THE ORIGINAL. THIS IS WHY THE 302 WOULD BE THROWN OUT IN ANY NON-CIRCUS. Again, HOW THE FUCK DO YOU GLOSS OVER THAT FACT AS A LAW BLOG?!?!?

I got kids crying. I can no longer read this garbage.

 

[sealybobo]

Here is a wiki piece about Powell.
With the election fraud rubbish still raging it's interesting to know about her a bit. Lake of it What you will.

Sidney Powell - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

She tried to steal our election! She should be hung

Sidney Powell

The computer forensics team was at the county elections office in Douglas, Ga., to make copies of voting equipment in an effort that documents show was arranged by Sidney Powell and others allied with then-President Donald Trump.

A Republican Party official in Georgia told a computer forensics team to copy components of the voting system at a rural elections office two months after the 2020 election and spent nearly all day there, contradicting her sworn deposition testimony about her role in the alleged breach of the equipment,

Am I understanding this correctly? They tampered with the voting machines after the election and wanted to claim something else?

Fake Trump Elector Misrepresented Role In Alleged Voting Data Breach: Court Filing

The Georgia secretary of state's office has described the copying of data from Coffee County's election system as an “alleged unauthorized access.”

www.huffpost.com

 

[AntonToo]

She tried to steal our election! She should be hung

Hmm maybe cruel, definetly unusual.

 

[sealybobo]

Hmm maybe cruel, definetly unusual.

The more we learn

Geoffrey Berman served as U.S. Attorney in the Southern District. In his memoir, Holding the Line, he describes how the Dept. of Justice demanded he use his office to aid the Trump administration.

When one attorney general wouldn't go after one of Trump's political opponents, he would fire them or get another attorney general in another district to take up his case. Weaponized the Justice Department

They lost their shit when they believed Obama weaponized the FBI.

Remember Republicans lost their shit just because Bill Clinton met with Lynch briefly on an airplane at the time she was investigating Hillary. Today they defend Trump demanding Barr be his fixer.

 

[sealybobo]

Here is the confession of massive voter fraud straight from ChiMo Pedo Joe Pro Quo Biden's mouth.





Why are you in such fucking denial? He's right there on video!

You're a fucking idiot.

Have you seen the evidence that all your "the election was rigged" bs was all lies? And the news organizations who went along with the big lie, here is what they were saying off air

“Really crazy stuff. And damaging,” Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch said in an email on Nov. 19, weeks after the election, regarding claims Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was making on Fox News.

Top Fox News anchors like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham expressed disbelief in what Sidney Powell, a pro-Trump attorney who had aggressively promoted claims of election fraud, had said at the time, too.

“Sydney Powell is lying,” Tucker Carlson said in a text message to his producer, misspelling Powell’s first name. Meanwhile Laura Ingraham said in a message to Carlson: “Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy.”

 

[sealybobo]

Hmm maybe cruel, definetly unusual.

What do you do to traitors to our country? To people who would try to rig our elections?

Is she crazy and/or a liar? Then why is Trump working with her? Oh I forgot. Trump's a crazy liar too. They are perfect for each other.

“Really crazy stuff. And damaging,” Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch said in an email on Nov. 19, weeks after the election, regarding claims Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was making on Fox News.

Top Fox News anchors like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham expressed disbelief in what Sidney Powell, a pro-Trump attorney who had aggressively promoted claims of election fraud, had said at the time, too.

“Sydney Powell is lying,” Tucker Carlson said in a text message to his producer, misspelling Powell’s first name. Meanwhile Laura Ingraham said in a message to Carlson: “Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy.”

 

[Muhammed]

Have you seen the evidence that all your "the election was rigged" bs was all lies? And the news organizations who went along with the big lie, here is what they were saying off air

“Really crazy stuff. And damaging,” Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch said in an email on Nov. 19, weeks after the election, regarding claims Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was making on Fox News.

Top Fox News anchors like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham expressed disbelief in what Sidney Powell, a pro-Trump attorney who had aggressively promoted claims of election fraud, had said at the time, too.

“Sydney Powell is lying,” Tucker Carlson said in a text message to his producer, misspelling Powell’s first name. Meanwhile Laura Ingraham said in a message to Carlson: “Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy.”

Quid Pro Pedo Joe confessed, jackass.

 

[sealybobo]

Quid Pro Pedo Joe confessed, jackass.

Even Fox News personalities have admitted they lied to you. They called you good people, but they needed to tell you what you wanted to hear. That's all I need to know about you guys. This is the problem with society. You are okay with your side lying to you.

You catch one mistake a liberal site says and you say SEE THEY ARE LIARS but now we know Fox News model is to lie to you idiots.

And it's not news. It's Fox Propoganda.