DOJ Appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel - Jerome Corsi Rejects Plea Deal

[Deranged Rhino]

Comey transcript released: 

https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Comey-interview-12-17-18-redacted.pdf

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Franklin said:

Judge threatened Flynn in order to ensure his full cooperation, and that of future witnesses. He was just flexing, as judges do. 

 

Flynn ain’t getting time and it’s doubtful the judge was going to sentence him to prison. But Flynn will wring a few more ounces out of his memory after today’s theater.  

 

 

 

If the judge threatened Flynn, that would be a gross dereliction of his duty as a judge.

[Deranged Rhino]

37 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The WH is spreading the lie he was entrapped 

 

It's not a lie. It's what the facts show - including Comey's own words and McCabe's. Sullivan wanted to toss the case today had Flynn withdrew his plea. He practically was begging Flynn to do so because of this.

[DC Tom]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

Comey transcript released: 

https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Comey-interview-12-17-18-redacted.pdf

 

Summary:

"I don't recall."

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

If the judge threatened Flynn, that would be a gross dereliction of his duty as a judge.

 

Facts don't matter when you're so desperate to be "right". He's lost it... though I guess my residency in his head for the last two years is partially to blame.

[DC Tom]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

Sullivan wanted to toss the case today had Flynn withdrew his plea. He practically was begging Flynn to do so because of this.

 

Actually, no.  Asking the defendant if they want to retract their guilty plea is common due diligence on the judge's part, particularly if the defendant has stated they have grounds for an affirmative defense (such as government misconduct).  

 

A judge has the authority to toss out a deal or guilty plea he thinks is unjust or forced, and send a case to trial.  That Sullivan didn't do that is a stronger indicator than badgering Flynn about withdrawing his plea.  What it's an indicator of depends entirely on one's bias in this case.

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Facts don't matter when you're so desperate to be "right". He's lost it... though I guess my residency in his head for the last two years is partially to blame.

 

With the mess you've made, you're not getting your deposit back.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

Actually, no.  Asking the defendant if they want to retract their guilty plea is common due diligence on the judge's part, particularly if the defendant has stated they have grounds for an affirmative defense (such as government misconduct).  

 

A judge has the authority to toss out a deal or guilty plea he thinks is unjust or forced, and send a case to trial.  That Sullivan didn't do that is a stronger indicator than badgering Flynn about withdrawing his plea.  What it's an indicator of depends entirely on one's bias in this case.

 

He kept repeating it, even after Flynn refused not once but twice - and after stating the actions taken by the investigators on the case bothered him greatly (as did Flynn's lying in the White House). It is standard practice to ask. It's not standard practice to attempt to elicit that response.

 

Not entirely connected to the above, but a good thread all the same:

 

 

*************

 

Already the lie is being repeated without being checked: 

 

Give it another week and certain posters down here will be repeating this as if it's a stone cold fact rather than an invention. 

 

Much like Prague. 

 

Much like tinkle tapes.

 

Much like Russian Collusion.

 

...And round and round we go.

 

 

************************

 

(so slimy)

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[Benjamin Franklin]

47 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

If the judge threatened Flynn, that would be a gross dereliction of his duty as a judge.

 

Judges lean on parties ALL. THE. TIME.

 

Of course they shouldn't. Of course they do. 

[boyst]

5 minutes ago, Benjamin Franklin said:

 

Judges lean on parties ALL. THE. TIME.

 

Of course they shouldn't. Of course they do. 

It depends on the size of the judge. A small judge won't have much to lean with. And they still shouldn't. 

[Deranged Rhino]

6 minutes ago, Benjamin Franklin said:

 

Judges lean on parties ALL. THE. TIME.

 

Of course they shouldn't. Of course they do. 

 

That's not, at all, what was done today. 

 

Worth a listen: 

 

 

[DC Tom]

10 minutes ago, Benjamin Franklin said:

 

Judges lean on parties ALL. THE. TIME.

 

Of course they shouldn't. Of course they do. 

 

By threatening them with additional charges?

 

No, they don't.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

But McCabe isn't the sort of guy to hold a grudge, is he?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Nanker]

Flynn’s protecting his son. His son was a bombastic hubris-filled douche during the campaign who likely stepped over the lines and Mueller is using that to squeeze Flynn. 

 

The General is falling on his sword. 

[Deranged Rhino]

12 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Flynn’s protecting his son. His son was a bombastic hubris-filled douche during the campaign who likely stepped over the lines and Mueller is using that to squeeze Flynn. 

 

The General is falling on his sword. 

 

Without a doubt this plays a role. 

 

This just happened. Sullivan really wants Flynn to pull his plea:

 

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

29 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Without a doubt this plays a role. 

 

This just happened. Sullivan really wants Flynn to pull his plea:

 

 

1

Clearly, Judge Sullivan is most unhappy with what is going on. Maybe he thinks Flynn is a terrible human being who deserves far more than what is being recommended at sentencing, or maybe he thinks Flynn is being squeezed via prosecutorial misconduct and wants it to come out?

The more I am reading, the more extraordinary today's proceedings become.  

[DC Tom]

39 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Without a doubt this plays a role. 

 

This just happened. Sullivan really wants Flynn to pull his plea:

 

 

 

Sullivan really wants something.  I wouldn't yet commit to what.

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Clearly, Judge Sullivan is most unhappy with what is going on. Maybe he thinks Flynn is a terrible human being who deserves far more than what is being recommended at sentencing, or maybe he thinks Flynn is being squeezed via prosecutorial misconduct and wants it to come out?

The more I am reading, the more extraordinary today's proceedings become.  

 

I've spoken to two different people now who were in the room. Will Chamberlain (a few posts up) posted a good periscope video (about 16 minutes long) about his experience in the room and it matched very closely with what my sources relayed to me. Despite the reporting, Sullivan clearly knows Flynn didn't lie. He doesn't want to sentence someone for something he knows they didn't do (which is why Sullivan rocks regardless of the outcome) - but his hands are tied unless Flynn pulls his plea. His "it's arguably treason" talk was (in these people's opinions and the reality of his word choice) a plea to Flynn more than an admonishment. 

 

Sullivan smells a rat. Just the way he got placed onto this case alone is enough for someone to have suspicions in his position. But unless Flynn pulls his plea, he can't do anything. 

 

On the flip side - if you strip away the rest of the noise (even my own opinions on what's happening) - the SCO was dangling the indictments from yesterday over Flynn's head. If he pulls his plea, he loses his deal. Sullivan knows this, which is why he asked the SCO if they had considered prosecuting him for treason - then had them admit it would be at best a Logan Act violation which he replied "that's what I wanted to hear". The decode of that is he knows the other charges they're dangling over Flynn don't have teeth (which, if you turn on the news right now you'd never be able to discern). He wanted Flynn to hear that, and reconsider his options. 

 

Here's the big takeaway for me: the moment the judge (and then the media) said getting paid by a foreign government while working the White House (which Flynn was never doing btw) is treason - a lot of people in the past few administrations shot up in their seats. If they're going to press treason charges for FARA - and you circle back to my larger thoughts on Mueller's main target being K-Street and lobbyists - then today was even more layered and interesting. 

 

My quick thoughts while waiting for a meeting to start...  

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Sullivan really wants something.  I wouldn't yet commit to what.

 

My DOJ people told me (after I posted that) this is a standard order from his bench and not to read too much into it... which they know I will anyway  

[Buffalo_Gal]

4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I've spoken to two different people now who were in the room. Will Chamberlain (a few posts up) posted a good periscope video (about 16 minutes long) about his experience in the room and it matched very closely with what my sources relayed to me. Despite the reporting, Sullivan clearly knows Flynn didn't lie. He doesn't want to sentence someone for something he knows they didn't do (which is why Sullivan rocks regardless of the outcome) - but his hands are tied unless Flynn pulls his plea. His "it's arguably treason" talk was (in these people's opinions and the reality of his word choice) a plea to Flynn more than an admonishment. 

 

Sullivan smells a rat. Just the way he got placed onto this case alone is enough for someone to have suspicions in his position. But unless Flynn pulls his plea, he can't do anything. 

 

On the flip side - if you strip away the rest of the noise (even my own opinions on what's happening) - the SCO was dangling the indictments from yesterday over Flynn's head. If he pulls his plea, he loses his deal. Sullivan knows this, which is why he asked the SCO if they had considered prosecuting him for treason - then had them admit it would be at best a Logan Act violation which he replied "that's what I wanted to hear". The decode of that is he knows the other charges they're dangling over Flynn don't have teeth (which, if you turn on the news right now you'd never be able to discern). He wanted Flynn to hear that, and reconsider his options. 

 

Here's the big takeaway for me: the moment the judge (and then the media) said getting paid by a foreign government while working the White House (which Flynn was never doing btw) is treason - a lot of people in the past few administrations shot up in their seats. If they're going to press treason charges for FARA - and you circle back to my larger thoughts on Mueller's main target being K-Street and lobbyists - then today was even more layered and interesting. 

 

My quick thoughts while waiting for a meeting to start...  

1

I learned a new term today: sua sponte. I am not certain it applies to this situation (I am not an attorney and do not play one on the internet), but it certainly adds a twist if it could apply.