ohnonotgmail wrote: » i presume you have a source for that very serious allegation?
The plea agreement signed by Flynn, his lawyers, and the prosecutors explicitly states: “No agreements, promises, understandings, or representations have been made by the parties or their counsel other than those contained in writing herein, nor will any such agreements, promises, understandings, or representations be made unless committed to writing and signed by [Flynn], defense counsel, and the Special Counsel’s Office.” But there are documents from Flynn’s former lawyers stating that “We have a lawyers’ unofficial understanding that they are unlikely to charge Junior in light of the Cooperation Agreement.” They went on to say in other internal emails that “The government took pains not to give a promise to MTF regarding Michael Jr., so as to limit how much of a ‘benefit’ it would have to disclose as part of its Giglio disclosures to any defendant against whom MTF may one day testify.” If true, prosecutors were being too cute by half. The only reason we know about this potential side deal is because Flynn’s new lawyers filed these excerpts after the old firm turned over sixty-eight hundred new documents it had inadvertently failed to give Flynn’s new counsel. Particularly problematic for Flynn’s former lawyers was the Justice Department’s threat to prosecute Flynn and his son for FARA violations unless Flynn agreed to plead guilty to lying to federal agents. Why was this problematic for the former lawyers? They were the lawyers who advised Flynn and his son about what needed to be disclosed to the government in the FARA filing.
Needless to say, Flynn’s plea agreement makes no mention of any commitment by prosecutors to refrain from charging Flynn’s son with a crime, notwithstanding how central that commitment appears to have been to the plea bargain. Not only does this appear to be a willful misrepresentation to the sentencing judge; it laid the groundwork for deceiving future juries and judges. Mueller’s prosecutors gave Flynn a cooperation agreement because they anticipated calling him to testify in other cases. He would be expected to testify that his written plea agreement stated the totality of his understandings with prosecutors. By doing so, he would mislead juries and judges about what promises (or threats) prosecutors made to induce him to plead guilty and cooperate; jurors would not learn that Mueller’s prosecutors had exploited Flynn’s love for his son to squeeze him into a guilty plea.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » soundsto me like a problem with flynns former liars, i mean lawyers. an unofficial understanding is not a plea agreement. if the prosecutors did anything wrong then the judge will be pissed and act accordingly. we have nothing of that sort.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » now that the corrupt Barr has intervened the FBI need to go after Flynn Jr. again.
notobtuse wrote: » Yeah there was a problem with his former lawyers, but the bigger problem lies with the slimy prosecutors.
notobtuse wrote: » And you would think so about the judge. But this judge Sullivan (appointed by Bill Clinton) seems to hate Flynn. He could refuse to dismiss the case and demand answers from the DOJ about who requested the sudden change of face, or he would set about getting answers from the prosecutors as to why they withheld the arrangements to the plea deal from him. But bottom line, the judge can’t force the Department of Justice to prosecute Flynn.
notobtuse wrote: » Sullivan has shown contempt for Flynn in the past: “I am not hiding my disgust, my disdain for this criminal offense,” the judge said at a December 2018 hearing. “Arguably, you sold your country out.”
notobtuse wrote: » Yeah, prove to the people the whole thing actually was a witch-hunt. Smart move. :rolleyes: The first law of holes... “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging".
ohnonotgmail wrote: » as you said yourself the fbi looked the other way because his father pled guilty. now that is off the table the gloves can come off again. no reason why they shouldn't
notobtuse wrote: » Why don't you tell us all what Flynn jr did and why it would be illegal? Then tell us all about the other well connected people who do exactly the same thing and the FBI doesn't give a damn because it's not such a big deal as it's full of gray area... unless the FBI wants to entrap someone, evidently.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » Flynn is getting off BECAUSE he is well connected. guilty as sin but you dont care because he is trumps buddy. a corrupt president leading a corrupt administration. hopefully there will be a lot of prison orange in all their futures.
notobtuse wrote: » Moving the goalposts, again, I see.
notobtuse wrote: » Hmmm… So it was just revealed that President Barack Obama was aware of the details of wiretapped conversations of Trump’s campaign, meaning Obama was directly knowledgeable of the efforts to surveil the Trump campaign and undermine the incoming administration. Oh, my!“There’s more to come, from what I understand. and they’re gonna be far greater than what you’ve seen so far—and what you’ve seen so far has been incredible—especially as it relates to President Obama because if anyone thinks that he and sleepy Joe Biden didn’t know what was going on, they have another thing coming.” ~ Donald Trump Just in time for the start of the general election season. Might be a good time for democrats to consider lawyering up.
Carfacemandog wrote: » "If you win, you need not have to explain...If you lose, you should not be there to explain."
notobtuse wrote: » Poor democrats. Can’t stand that partial justice was provided to American patriot General Flynn as the DOJ properly withdrew criminal charges against him, or that the underhanded actions of the Comey's FBI and Loretta Lynch’s DOJ under Barack Obama launched a vendetta against the general, or that the corrupt Mueller investigators used the FBI's underhanded work to threaten Flynn's family and basically coerce a false guilty plea from him, or how it is now evident Representative Adam Schiff has been fully exposed as the lying piece of garbage that he truly is as it comes out that he never saw ANY direct evidence proving Trump/Russia collusion that he has claimed for the past three years. Quite a bad day for democrats for being a Friday, which is usually a slow news day.
notobtuse wrote: » With the coronavirus shutdowns it would be smart to keep Joe Biden isolated in his Delaware basement and have his communications director pretend to be him on social media. Instead it seems Joe has a need to be on camera and he’s being put out there in a series of gawd-awful videos. He can’t even read from scripts and now Joe’s wife Jill is sitting with him and doing most of the talking. Seems some democrats are finally waking up and smelling the coffee, and now there's some regarding replacing him has gone from IF it is going to happen, to WHEN it is going to happen.
Brian? wrote: » Why did he plead guilty?
Brian? wrote: » Deja vue, the same absolute nonsense you were spouting in 2016 about Hillary
notobtuse wrote: » Because our lovely government out Russia’d the Russia FSB with a perjury trap. They broke him, bankrupted him, and blackmailed him into pleading to things that later turned out not to be illegal. That’s why he tried to withdraw his plea.
rossie1977 wrote: » Trump fired him for lying to Pence before any FBI investigation took place. Let's be honest, the reason he withdrew his plea is because he cut a sweet deal with Barr. He would be spending years in prison otherwise. He pleaded guilty not once but twice.
Brian? wrote: » Is it illegal to wire tap a political campaign? No.
notobtuse wrote: » Tell that to Nixon. And yes it is if the FISA warrant is obtained through unlawful means... as was in this case.
notobtuse wrote: » At least Hillary was productive wiping clean bathroom hard drives with top secret intel on them with a cloth.
notobtuse wrote: » Yes he did plead guilty twice. Honorable men will keep falling on their swords. But as luck turns out justice and the law helped patch up his wounds.
