Flynn makes a deal
- Thread starter Midnightrider
- Start date
You obviously don't read much other than Faux news.
every day Mueller asks for more information that is leading to the public knowing more and more about the depths of the ties between his people and possibly himself and Russia.
"I have not heard a single person say anything about inaccurate information spread about anyone by the Russians." You must be deaf, dumb and blind if that is true
Exactly! And there is practically nothing whatsoever there.
Perhaps you should start paying attention to any news.
This_person
Well-Known Member
Asking for information is not proof of any issue. It's an investigation. When you investigate to find an issue, you seek information.
Exactly. And everyday we are shown more eveidence that Trump and Co were tied to Russia in a myriad of ways. And we are only at Flynn at so far
Links?
My company did a lot of business with Russia at one point too. What does that mean? ;-p
PsyOps
Pixelated
You do know Trump has done business in Russia for decades? He has done business all over the world. There are obviously going to be ties between Trump and Russia. If it was so obviously clear any of these dealings were illegal it would have come out long ago.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
All I see every day is that Hillary purchased a dossier, and spread a rumor that so far has proven untrue.
Maybe you are just blind.
This_person
Well-Known Member
Where's the smallest shred of evidence of Russia meddling, and doing so at the request of the Trump campaign or personnel.
It’s all in their minds....like Vrai said “ secret codes ans dog whistles”
I did too......just sitting back waiting for my subpoena..........
"On the surface, Friday’s order seems inconsequential, but in comparing the December 12, 2017, version to the February 16, 2018, version, one substantive change stood out," explained Cleveland.
Here's what she noticed: "The revised version added one sentence specifying that the government’s obligation to produce evidence material either to the defendant’s guilt or punishment 'includes producing, during plea negotiations, any exculpatory evidence in the government’s possession.'"
This add-on is significant, she argues, because it "indicates that, if the government did not provide Flynn material evidence during plea negotiations, Flynn has grounds to withdraw his plea."
Cleveland acknowledges that it's unclear if Sullivan "modified the standing order in response to special concerns in the Flynn case," but noted that "it differs from the model text he included in his 2016 article, as well as the standing order he used most recently in a criminal case from August 2017."
Moreover, in the revised order, the judge added "a lengthy footnote" "detailing the case law and setting forth his position that, if material exculpatory evidence is withheld during plea negotiations, a defendant is entitled to withdraw his guilty plea."
REPORT: Mike Flynn Moving To Withdraw Guilty Plea. Here's Why.
Here's what she noticed: "The revised version added one sentence specifying that the government’s obligation to produce evidence material either to the defendant’s guilt or punishment 'includes producing, during plea negotiations, any exculpatory evidence in the government’s possession.'"
This add-on is significant, she argues, because it "indicates that, if the government did not provide Flynn material evidence during plea negotiations, Flynn has grounds to withdraw his plea."
Cleveland acknowledges that it's unclear if Sullivan "modified the standing order in response to special concerns in the Flynn case," but noted that "it differs from the model text he included in his 2016 article, as well as the standing order he used most recently in a criminal case from August 2017."
Moreover, in the revised order, the judge added "a lengthy footnote" "detailing the case law and setting forth his position that, if material exculpatory evidence is withheld during plea negotiations, a defendant is entitled to withdraw his guilty plea."
REPORT: Mike Flynn Moving To Withdraw Guilty Plea. Here's Why.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
its funny, this is getting passed around like it is gospel but all the stories go back to the one written by margot Cleveland. She does not list any reference for the new order by judge Sullivan.
do you have any links that include the order
Not Yet ... speculation on what 'could' happen ...
after the Order From Judge Emmet Sullivan to provide Flynn’s attorneys “any exculpatory evidence,”
http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/19/michael-flynns-plea-reversal-uncover-federal-corruption/
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.
Just a week ago, and thus before Sullivan quietly directed Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team to provide Flynn’s attorneys “any exculpatory evidence,” Washington Examiner columnist Byron York detailed the oddities of Flynn’s case. The next day, former assistant U.S. attorney and National Review contributing editor Andrew McCarthy connected more of the questionable dots. York added even more details a couple of days later. Together these articles provide the backdrop necessary to understand the significance of Sullivan’s order on Friday.
Byron York and Andrew McCarthy are always right on the mark. McCarthy, a former Fed Prosecutor, has some keen insight and insights in to the whole process and progress of Mueller's activities.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
not just a lack of a link to the actual document, but a lack of a reference as to where the author heard about it.
that's speculation based on an op ed