https://media.townhall.com/Townhall/...0521124533.jpg
|
The law does not require he drops the case, it does require he review and render a decision. Nice spin right though. No doubt the dufus is pacing the floor awaiting his campaign conspiracy theory around this latest move by Barr, oh wait he already has started Obamagate.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Quote:
The law does not require he drops the case,
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_48
“the government may, with leave of court, dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint.”
The “leave of court” provision was meant “primarily to guard against the prospect that dismissal is part of a scheme of ‘prosecutorial harassment’ of the defendant through repeated prosecutions—a prospect not implicated by, as here, a motion to dismiss with prejudice "
“the principal object of the ‘leave of court’ requirement is apparently to protect a defendant against prosecutorial harassment, e.g., charging, dismissing, and recharging, when the government moves to dismiss an indictment over the defendant’s objection.”
It is not there so the judge can over rule the prosecution's decision to no longer prosecute the case . Sullivan has nothing . That is why he is hiring representation for his own defense .
The Obama FBI at work.
FBI documents unsealed Wednesday show that top bureau officials discussed their motivations for interviewing then-national security adviser Michael Flynn in the White House in January 2017 -- and openly questioned if their "goal" was "to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired."The handwritten notes -- written by the FBI's former head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap after a meeting with then-FBI Director James Comey and then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Fox News is told -- further suggested that agents planned in the alternative to get Flynn "to admit to breaking the Logan Act" when he spoke to then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the presidential transition period.
The Logan Act is an obscure statute that has never been used in a criminal prosecution; enacted in 1799 in an era before telephones, it was intended to prevent individuals from falsely claiming to represent the United States government abroad.
"What is our goal?" one of the notes read. "Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?"
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mic...-him-lie-fired
Oh well. I'm going to church this morning to worship the Lord with other Christians. It will be a little pocket of sanity in this corrupt environment we more and more live in, a light shining in an otherwise dark sky. Thank God for Jesus.
amen to thatQuote:
Oh well. I'm going to church this morning to worship the Lord with other Christians. It will be a little pocket of sanity in this corrupt environment we more and more live in, a light shining in an otherwise dark sky. Thank God for Jesus.
Are we missing the obvious here? What if Flynn had just told the truth and been honest with Pence, and the FBI?
His honesty with Pence cost him his job. He was NOT dishonest with the FBI .
Andrew McCabe who was deputy director under Comey testified to Congress that the 2 agents who interviews Flynn did NOT think he was lying . We also know that the 302 submitted by the FBI of the Flynn interview was fabricated . The original written by agents Joe Pientka and Peter Srzok (you've heard of him ...... recall his hateful emails to Lisa Page about Trump).
FBI 302s, are supposed to be completed within five days of the interview. Usually, one agent is the main interrogator, another takes notes; one of the two is responsible for drafting the 302, which the two agents then finalize, making sure that between their memories and any notes taken,that the 302 accurately reflects the interviewee’s statements.
The Flynn 302 went through multiple drafts and were heavy edited . They were still being edited on Feb. 10, 17 days after the interview. And, we know from text messages, it was being edited by Lisa Page who was working forMcCabe and she was not present at the Flynn interview. She had no business editing what Flynn said. The 302 was not finalized until Feb. 15.
Pientka’s first draft, Strzok’s alterations of it, Page’s alterations of Strzok’s draft were never submitted to the judge . So any fair minded system would see that a miscarriage of justice was happening to Flynn . The most hardened criminal would be informed by the FBI that the interview being conducted was because he was the subject of an investigation . We have emails from the agents before the interview asking if their goal was to get him fired ,or to set up a perjury trap.
Has Beth Wilkinson retained counsel yet?
I don't know about Wilkerson, but even if Flynn gets off the damage is done to the administrations already fraying credibility. Get use to the crony ads from the dems as the election draws near, and the economy and the pandemic becomes the issue. The dufus will have more to worry about than just his buddies, if he doesn't take care of his electorate.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ju...?ocid=msedgntp
Quote:
The judge must evaluate Flynn’s dramatically different claims, Sullivan’s lawyer Beth Wilkinson told the court: “What, if anything, should Judge Sullivan do about Mr. Flynn’s sworn statements to the court, where he repeatedly admitted to the crime and to the voluntariness of his guilty plea, only to now claim that he never lied to the government and was pressured and misled into pleading guilty?”
https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-16000-pleas-federal-rule-criminal-procedure-11
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:55 AM. |