Jump to content

Michael Flynn

Rate this topic


Flybyme

Recommended Posts

1 min ago, DoOver said:

I do not use any intoxicates, at all.

 

I fish.

 

You people have run up our collective azzes for years, that though a defendant is caught red ****ing handed, if ANY part of the Government system went awry, that defendant, generally a person of the color other than of White, was not prosecuted.

 

That still stand with youse??

No idea what you are saying. 

If I had to guess, you mean that if a lawyer could find an issue with how a case was being prosecuted he would have the charges dismissed. 

I’m not sure how you are relating that to someone walking before a judge and saying “guilty” to the charges. 

Michael Flynn went before a judge and admitted guilt. 

What’s the “other than White” have to do with this at all? Are you saying a former General, NSA, and DNI who was “other than White” who lied to a investigator and subsequently plead GUILTY, would be treated differently?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, patchyfog said:

PG's righties tend to forget such trivialities as guilty pleas.

Know much about the law? No man is forced to take a prior guilty plea if they don’t want to before sentencing. It is reversible as an accused cannot be forced to go to jail without pleading guilty or being found guilty via a trail. 

 

Standard practice is that a guilty plea requires an elocution at the sentencing, an acknowledgement of the guilt. Presiding judge will demand it and must hear it from the accused. Thus, guilty pleas can be rescinded by the defendant. That forces one of two things:

 

Either a trial date is set and discovery begins 

 

OR

 

Charges are dropped. 

 

So let’s see, how does this play out? Oh, yeah, only evidence now appears to be the witness testimony of Strzok since the only crime alleged is the claim of lying. Lacking a corroborating witness, a tape record or stenographer, Strzok has to take the stand as he is the prosecution's only witness and only evidence. Flynn's attorney gets to cross examine and will likely have the latitude to get to Strzok's mental state toward the witness. "Mr. Strzok, can you tell us why you were removed from the Special Counsel's team and assigned to the Personnel Office at the FBI?" Defense attorney gets to introduce what is in the public domain, specifically Strzok's text messages. Maybe they get to subpoena request from DOJ and FBI all texts and emails that mention Flynn, ALL of them. 

 

But I don’t think it gets that far. In a he said, he said, the general will beat the tainted ideologue senior FBI agent most days. Worst, the FBI won’t want more emails and text messages entered into a public record. 

 

Charges withdrawn, Flynn walks. 

 

But it what do I know? Apparently nothing according to patchy. 

“No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.”

- Victor Davis Hanson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PlumFishing said:

Just so I have this right: Gen. Flynn plead guilty to lying. But people here think he lied about lying. And think if he lied about lying he is guilty of lying. 

Wowzer.  

At the time there was talk that FBI has some charges that they could have brought against Flynn's son. That Flynn took the hit in return for his son not having to be charged. That’s motivation enough for some men. 

“No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.”

- Victor Davis Hanson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 mins ago, PlumFishing said:

So General Michael Flynn, who was Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and a National Security Advisor (thankfully briefly), was snookered by questioning by Peter Strzok.

And pleaded guilty. 

This is no babe in the woods, it’s a former General, head of DIA and NSA!

What planet are you people living on?

Let the Flynn conspiracy go and focus on the others. 

From Forbes back in November, before Flynn pleaded. 

 

 

NOV 27, 2017 @ 07:59 AM

Will Michael Flynn Plead Guilty And Cooperate To Protect His Son?

With Special Counsel Robert Mueller expected to indict both Michael T. Flynn, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, and Flynn’s son, Michael G. Flynn, in connection with the investigation into Russia’s intervention in the 2016 election, speculation is mounting as to whether the elder Flynn will plead guilty to help his son, and in the process help himself. The elder Flynn’s lawyers recently stopped communicating with the President’s legal defense team, which some interpret as Flynn preparing to cooperate with Mueller. While Flynn certainly is focused on his own potential liability, that his son is a “subject” of the investigation places the elder Flynn in the difficult position of cooperating and accepting criminal culpability, rather than fight, in order possibly to prevent his son from being prosecuted.

 

The extensive reporting around the involvement of Flynn’s son certainly suggests there is legitimate justification for interpreting the Flynn component of the investigation as a prosecutable family affair. Federal prosecutors leveraging one family member against another is a page directly out of a four-decade old prosecutorial playbook used successfully in Wall Street prosecutions. One need not look beyond the Enron prosecutions and guilty pleas of Andrew and Lea Fastow, husband and wife, and the Drexel-related guilty plea of Michael Milken, with Lowell Milken (his brother) averting prosecution, to find the use of this tactic in high profile white-collar prosecutions, that is outside of organized crime and gang prosecutions.

 

Considerable attention has focused on the potential bases for the investigation and possible prosecution of the elder Flynn. If Mueller’s team were to charge the elder Flynn, and particularly if the elder Flynn were to enter a guilty plea to some charge or charges, then the Special Counsel indictment of Paul Manafort and Robert Gates and the George Papadopolous Statement of the Offense related to Papadopolous’ guilty plea certainly shed light on potential charges. Based on the public reports of the subject matters of the investigation around the elder Flynn, Mueller likely would, at a minimum, include material false statements or omissions on filings under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and possibly on his security clearance form or FBI interview.

 

The culpability of and potential charges against Flynn’s son, based on public reports, is less clear. Media reports identify Flynn’s son as the Chief of Staff and principal aide to his father at Flynn Intel Group, his father’s consulting and lobbying firm. Reporting further reflects that Flynn’s son attended a December 2015 dinner in Moscow with his father, who sat at a table with Russia’s President; that Russian television network RT paid for Flynn’s son’s travel to Moscow, and RT begrudgingly registered in early November 2017 as a foreign agent under FARA; Flynn Intel Group received $530,000 for work benefitting the Turkish government; and work for Turkish interests relating to Fethullah Gulen, the United States resident Turkish cleric accused of fomenting an attempted coup in 2016. Flynn’s son’s attending meetings and communicating with clients are not, of themselves, criminal offenses. Rather, prosecutors will need evidence of Flynn’s son’s actual intentional participation in criminal acts or his intentionally conspiring with his father to commit a criminal act, in order to bring criminal charges. However, the elder Flynn’s legal team having stopped communicating with the President’s legal defense team may suggest that prosecutors have expressed privately their intent to bring such charges against Flynn and his son, and that they may be negotiating a resolution.

 

In order for the Special Counsel to threaten and actually bring criminal charges against Flynn’s son, the prosecutors must believe, as set forth in the United States Attorney’ Manual (USAM), that Flynn’s son’s “conduct constitutes a criminal offense, the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction and that a substantial federal interest would be served by the prosecution.” Normally, DOJ policy would disfavor leveraging one close family member against another. The Flynn scenario, however, falls expressly within an exception. That is “specific justification exists, among other circumstances, where (i) the witness and the relative participated in a common business enterprise and the testimony to be elicited relates to that enterprise or its activities; (ii) the testimony to be elicited relates to illegal conduct in which there is reason to believe that both the witness and the relative were active participants; or (iii) testimony to be elicited relates to a crime involving overriding prosecutorial concerns.” Mueller’s team need not look beyond the three alternative justifications – any one is sufficient for the exception to apply; meanwhile, all three expressly apply to the father-son Flynns.

(Snipped)

“No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.”

- Victor Davis Hanson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Withdrawing a guilty plea before sentencing is allowed under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(d)

 

(d) Withdrawing a Guilty or Nolo Contendere Plea. A defendant may withdraw a plea of guilty or nolo contendere:

(1) before the court accepts the plea, for any reason or no reason; or

(2) after the court accepts the plea, but before it imposes sentence if:

(A) the court rejects a plea agreement under 11(c)(5); or

(B) the defendant can show a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.

Edited by tomkaz

“No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.”

- Victor Davis Hanson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 mins ago, tomkaz said:

Know much about the law? No man is forced to take a prior guilty plea if they don’t want to before sentencing. It is reversible as an accused cannot be forced to go to jail without pleading guilty or being found guilty via a trail. 

 

Standard practice is that a guilty plea requires an elocution at the sentencing, an acknowledgement of the guilt. Presiding judge will demand it and must hear it from the accused. Thus, guilty pleas can be rescinded by the defendant. That forces one of two things:

 

Either a trial date is set and discovery begins 

 

OR

 

Charges are dropped. 

 

So let’s see, how does this play out? Oh, yeah, only evidence now appears to be the witness testimony of Strzok since the only crime alleged is the claim of lying. Lacking a corroborating witness, a tape record or stenographer, Strzok has to take the stand as he is the prosecution's only witness and only evidence. Flynn's attorney gets to cross examine and will likely have the latitude to get to Strzok's mental state toward the witness. "Mr. Strzok, can you tell us why you were removed from the Special Counsel's team and assigned to the Personnel Office at the FBI?" Defense attorney gets to introduce what is in the public domain, specifically Strzok's text messages. Maybe they get to subpoena request from DOJ and FBI all texts and emails that mention Flynn, ALL of them. 

 

But I don’t think it gets that far. In a he said, he said, the general will beat the tainted ideologue senior FBI agent most days. Worst, the FBI won’t want more emails and text messages entered into a public record. 

 

Charges withdrawn, Flynn walks. 

 

But it what do I know? Apparently nothing according to patchy. 

Sure, then he’s charged with FARA violations which he negotiated down, and then his idiot son also gets charged. 

He’s a cooperating witness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 mins ago, PlumFishing said:

Sure, then he’s charged with FARA violations which he negotiated down, and then his idiot son also gets charged. 

He’s a cooperating witness. 

All I am posting was in response to patchy's snark about the guilty plea, which can be withdrawn under special circumstances. And these are special circumstances. 

 

But you you are correct, failure to register is nothing to sneeze at, but now the prosecution's motives appear to be tainted and not working in good faith. Who knows what could happen. 

“No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.”

- Victor Davis Hanson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/4/2018 at 0:04 AM, PlumFishing said:

Sure, then he’s charged with FARA violations which he negotiated down, and then his idiot son also gets charged. 

He’s a cooperating witness. 

 

Just goes to show how screwed up the system really is, top to bottom..............

 

You are guilty of a crime, your son is guilty of a crime, you both should go to jail, but if you cooperate, cop a plea, and save us the time/trouble, we'll let your guilty kid go, and give you a sentence you can live with.

 

BS!!!!  All we ever do is let guilty people off easy, or off completely.  Why!!  And then we wonder why people break the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Submitted and stipulated by Mueller for all information discoverable to be turned over to team Flynn....................... This includes all love bird texting, as well as Andy's communications. If you look at the docket there have been 5 motions by a private citizen claming he has information Flynn was framed. Guess we might hear from him in the future...........

flynn.jpg

*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2018 at 11:36 PM, PlumFishing said:

 

What’s the “other than White” have to do with this at all? Are you saying a former General, NSA, and DNI who was “other than White” who lied to a investigator and subsequently plead GUILTY, would be treated differently?

 

It's the narrative that the alt-righties attest to: The white man is persecuted and dark skinned folk are given everything for free. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...