SectionC3 Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Warren Zevon said: #FLYNNDICATED I read the first 39 pages. This brief is an effin takedown so far. I do this for a living, and to this point in the submission I’m impressed.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 Just now, SectionC3 said: I read the first 39 pages. This brief is an effin takedown so far. I do this for a living, and to this point in the submission I’m impressed. It’s baseless, contradicted by the case record and Mueller’s own report — but yeah, it’s a “takedown” Proving that if you do do this for a living you’re terrible at it. GTFOH w that nonsense. 1
Warren Zevon Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: Mueller’s own report Sorry - you have not read the full Mueller report.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 Just now, Warren Zevon said: Sorry - you have not read the full Mueller report. I have though. And unlike you, I read it without having to move my lips.
Warren Zevon Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I have though Sorry - scribbling QANON conspiracies where the redacted parts are does not count. Edited June 10, 2020 by Warren Zevon 1
Deranged Rhino Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 A weak dodge from a weak mind who's been wrong on this topic since day one. For four years now. It's an impressive record of stupidity you've run up, Gar. Be proud. Everyone can see you for the fool you've always been.
SectionC3 Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 9 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It’s baseless, contradicted by the case record and Mueller’s own report — but yeah, it’s a “takedown” Proving that if you do do this for a living you’re terrible at it. GTFOH w that nonsense. You called the submission baseless and contradicted by, among other things, the “case record.” (A phrase that I read for the first time just now, for what it’s worth.) Prove it, big boy!
Warren Zevon Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 1 minute ago, SectionC3 said: You called the submission baseless and contradicted by, among other things, the “case record.” (A phrase that I read for the first time just now, for what it’s worth.) Prove it, big boy! Give him a break, he's read the underacted report.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 1 minute ago, SectionC3 said: You called the submission baseless and contradicted by, among other things, the “case record.” (A phrase that I read for the first time just now, for what it’s worth.) Prove it, big boy! By your own admission, this is the first filing you've read on the Flynn matter. You spent weeks telling everyone that you haven't read the submissions. Do your own homework, or keep believing nonsense legal arguments steeped in fake news sources rather than case law. You're proving you're a terrible attorney
SectionC3 Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: A weak dodge from a weak mind who's been wrong on this topic since day one. For four years now. It's an impressive record of stupidity you've run up, Gar. Be proud. Everyone can see you for the fool you've always been. Yuppers. Everyone else is wrong but you. That guilty plea? Flynn was just joking. Only kidding around. Did it for fun because he was playing Trumpian 4D chess and thought it would work out to his advantage in a way that only clairvoyants like this Psycho Rhino guy can see. That’s the ticket! Just now, Deranged Rhino said: By your own admission, this is the first filing you've read on the Flynn matter. You spent weeks telling everyone that you haven't read the submissions. Do your own homework, or keep believing nonsense legal arguments steeped in fake news sources rather than case law. You're proving you're a terrible attorney Fake logic. Even assuming that I hadn’t read any submission at the time what you characterize as the prior representations were made, I have not indicated that I did not engage in any such reading in the period between the time at which those representations were made and the present. And, in point of fact, I read part of the a memorandum previously submitted (and, ostensibly filed). Section C3, 1; Washed up Psycho Rhino, 0. 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: By your own admission, this is the first filing you've read on the Flynn matter. You spent weeks telling everyone that you haven't read the submissions. Do your own homework, or keep believing nonsense legal arguments steeped in fake news sources rather than case law. You're proving you're a terrible attorney Nice dodge, brochacho. Any chance you can educate me on how today’s submission is “baseless” and “contradicted” by the “case record?”
Deranged Rhino Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Yuppers. Everyone else is wrong but you. That guilty plea? Flynn was just joking. Only kidding around. Did it for fun because he was playing Trumpian 4D chess and thought it would work out to his advantage in a way that only clairvoyants like this Psycho Rhino guy can see. That’s the ticket! Note: he doesn't challenge the fact he has not read any of the filings. But he's taking a piece of nonsense and calling it a "take down" When ***** lawyers advertise how shite they are at their job, believe them. Edited June 10, 2020 by Deranged Rhino
3rdnlng Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Warren Zevon said: Give him a break, he's read the underacted report. ?
SectionC3 Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: By your own admission, this is the first filing you've read on the Flynn matter. You spent weeks telling everyone that you haven't read the submissions. Do your own homework, or keep believing nonsense legal arguments steeped in fake news sources rather than case law. You're proving you're a terrible attorney Maybe you can also enlighten me on some of the “case law” on which you rely. Can’t wait!
Deranged Rhino Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, SectionC3 said: Maybe you can also enlighten me on some of the “case law” on which you rely. Can’t wait! https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/01/united-states-v-fokker-services-b-v/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/15-3016/15-3016-2016-04-05.html Enjoy. Edited June 10, 2020 by Deranged Rhino
SectionC3 Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Note: he doesn't challenge the fact he has not read any of the filings. But he's taking a piece of nonsense and calling it a "take down" Why ***** lawyers advertise how shite they are at their job, believe them. FYI - calling the submission nonsense a bunch of times doesn’t actually make it nonsense. Also, have you considered consulting on this case? The General needs you. Only your brilliance can rescue this matter from the jaws of injustice. Certainly he would appreciate your expertise! 3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/01/united-states-v-fokker-services-b-v/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/15-3016/15-3016-2016-04-05.html Enjoy. Great stuff! I wasted 30 seconds of my life reading a case about a DPA and a speedy trial concern before wondering how that might possibly be relevant where, as here, the government seeks to abandon a prosecution that already has resulted in a conviction. Only your brilliant legal mind can explain this one to me!
Deranged Rhino Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 1 minute ago, SectionC3 said: FYI - calling the submission nonsense a bunch of times doesn’t actually make it nonsense. Nor does your endorsement mean anything other than the opposite of what you say. Here's a thread on why it's garbage, and your take is too. Because you're a ***** attorney, SectionC3. I mean that sincerely. You're terrible at all elements of your job. Your critical thinking is weak, your logic is soft, and your ability to write is journeyman at best. You've made that clear for months now with each piece of drivel you've written.
Buffalo_Gal Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 23 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It’s baseless, contradicted by the case record and Mueller’s own report — but yeah, it’s a “takedown” Proving that if you do do this for a living you’re terrible at it. GTFOH w that nonsense. Why do I get the idea SectionC3 is a receptionist at a law office and thinks he knows more than he actually does? 3
SectionC3 Posted June 10, 2020 Posted June 10, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Nor does your endorsement mean anything other than the opposite of what you say. Here's a thread on why it's garbage, and your take is too. Because you're a ***** attorney, SectionC3. I mean that sincerely. You're terrible at all elements of your job. Your critical thinking is weak, your logic is soft, and your ability to write is journeyman at best. You've made that clear for months now with each piece of drivel you've written. Hoax. Flynn lied. Then he admitted his lie was criminal. Then he got cold feet and decided he didn’t want to go to the can. And then, after the career prosecutor bailed on the case in what almost certainly was a protest, a political appointee tried to have the government abandon the prosecution. But the problem that none of those geniuses considered was that the government needs the permission of the court to do so! Oops! Nitpicking Mr. Gleeson’s submission doesn’t change any of those truths. Sad! 5 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Why do I get the idea SectionC3 is a receptionist at a law office and thinks he knows more than he actually does? Most likely because you have a lousy education, cling to Trump as a sliver of self worth, and generally have no clue what you’re talking about in the legal and political arenas. Edited June 10, 2020 by SectionC3
Recommended Posts