OldTimeAFLGuy Posted August 31, 2020 Posted August 31, 2020 56 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: you aren’t listening or willing to have a real conversation. None of that was before the court today. Literally, none of that. What was before the court was a procedural legal issue. Not the substance of the case. therefore, what I am telling you, and what you don’t seem to understand, is that saying any of that to argue it was a political decision is bizarre. I agree he will be free soon, I didn’t say anything about the case against Flynn. I only said what I said. Which was that a lot of people clearly have a misunderstanding of the decision today because they are missing that the issue before the court was a pure legal question of procedure, not the facts/evidence in this case. thats not a poor look for me as a lawyer. But Um, okay. not seeing the forest through the trees? No. I am talking about the decision TODAY. You are unable to do that ...um...er....well...uh...oh...ok.......after extensive rumination, think I'll wait for DR's response to weigh who has better knowledge and understanding of the subject (COUGH).....this should be good, but I'm objective......
Buffalo_Gal Posted August 31, 2020 Posted August 31, 2020 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: You keep missing the forest through the trees in your wish to be proven correct. The case has no foundation, no evidence to support it, and never should have been brought in the first place. You keep ignoring that part out of what I can only assume is partisanship. It's a poor look for a lawyer who's sworn to defend the constitution. What was done to Flynn flew in the face of the constitution and rule of law. He'll be free soon. Just watch. Well, they did tell Sullivan to wrap it up in that last line. Who knows if he will. And, will it be wrapped November 4th? Or sooner?
Numark3 Posted August 31, 2020 Posted August 31, 2020 10 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said: ...um...er....well...uh...oh...ok.......after extensive rumination, think I'll wait for DR's response to weigh who has better knowledge and understanding of the subject (COUGH).....this should be good, but I'm objective...... DR has a great understanding of the substance of the case. Way better than me. But the decision today didn’t address the substance at all. All I was saying is that the court’s decision wasn’t political, and there is no indication they applied the wrong law. It looks like a good decision. it likely will nonetheless lead to Flynn being free soon. That’s not my point it’s just a pet peeve of mine for people to complain about a decision based on reasons not even before the court.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted August 31, 2020 Posted August 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Crayola64 said: DR has a great understanding of the substance of the case. Way better than me. But the decision today didn’t address the substance at all. All I was saying is that the court’s decision wasn’t political, and there is no indication they applied the wrong law. It looks like a good decision. it likely will nonetheless lead to Flynn being free soon. That’s not my point it’s just a pet peeve of mine for people to complain about a decision based on reasons not even before the court. ...understood and so noted......we're good...opinions make it work.....
Numark3 Posted August 31, 2020 Posted August 31, 2020 2 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said: ...understood and so noted......we're good...opinions make it work..... yea. I don’t know anything about the facts of this case. Sounds like 100% chance it’s going away though....at some point
snafu Posted September 1, 2020 Posted September 1, 2020 5 hours ago, Crayola64 said: DR has a great understanding of the substance of the case. Way better than me. But the decision today didn’t address the substance at all. All I was saying is that the court’s decision wasn’t political, and there is no indication they applied the wrong law. It looks like a good decision. it likely will nonetheless lead to Flynn being free soon. That’s not my point it’s just a pet peeve of mine for people to complain about a decision based on reasons not even before the court. I don’t disagree with your take that this was a decision based on procedure. I also think that people who say that this is politically motivated perhaps feel that the Court, at three levels now, has had a few chances to end this thing in favor of Flynn, but they seem to be delaying the inevitable until after this election is completed. 2 1
BillsFanNC Posted September 1, 2020 Posted September 1, 2020 it's almost as if they're panicking and trying to get out in front of something big looming on the horizon. 2
Nanker Posted September 2, 2020 Posted September 2, 2020 On 8/31/2020 at 9:44 PM, snafu said: I don’t disagree with your take that this was a decision based on procedure. I also think that people who say that this is politically motivated perhaps feel that the Court, at three levels now, has had a few chances to end this thing in favor of Flynn, but they seem to be delaying the inevitable until after this election is completed. Sullivan is running out the clock and will wait to rule until after the election. In my view he will probably dismiss the case if Trump wins. He will sentence Flynn if Biden wins. If he does sentence Flynn, Trump will pardon Flynn - if he’s still the POTUS. 1
B-Man Posted September 2, 2020 Posted September 2, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: WELL, THEY COULDN’T RULE AGAINST IT WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT — THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN RACIST. Court rules NSA phone snooping illegal — after 7-year delay. Edited September 2, 2020 by B-Man 2 1
Deranged Rhino Posted September 4, 2020 Author Posted September 4, 2020 2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Sometimes, twitter is awesome. and 3 1
Recommended Posts