Barr Installs Outside Prosecutor to Review Case Against Michael Flynn, Ex-Trump Adviser

[Anonymous]

This....doesnt say what Flynn defenders think it says.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This....doesnt say what Flynn defenders think it says.

For those of us who think Flynn is guilty but aren’t lawyers and are tired of trying to muddle through: what does it mean.

[Anonymous]

Sullivan is a tool

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sullivan is a tool

Yep.
Proves that Sullivan is pursuing this for political reasons.

[Anonymous]

No. It proves that Sullivan is focused on justice.
Good for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. It proves that Sullivan is focused on justice.
Good for him.

Do you mean the justice of exculpatory evidence not being shared with thf defendant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. It proves that Sullivan is focused on justice.
Good for him.

Do you mean the justice of exculpatory evidence not being shared with thf defendant?

Nope. Not talking fairy tales. I’m talking about holding a confessed traitor to account.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. It proves that Sullivan is focused on justice.
Good for him.

Do you mean the justice of exculpatory evidence not being shared with thf defendant?

Nope. Not talking fairy tales. I’m talking about holding a confessed traitor to account.

DP. What traitorous activities did he confess to?

[Anonymous]

There are 125 pages of the different illegal activities Flynn has engaged in.

Oh, and why did he just swear an oath to QAnon? That is.....strange. It's almost like he wants to lead a digital and literal insurrection against the USA.

[Anonymous]

Why does the Flynn case remind me of this scene?

[Anonymous]

Good question

https://www.lawfareblog.com/durham-investigation-what-we-know-and-what-it-means

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sullivan is a tool

As Judge Sullivan notes, he is forced to grant a motion he had "not yet resolved, based on alleged harms to a party that did not seek mandamus, and in reliance on arguments never presented to the district court."

As such, totally predictable and normal he would ask for this review. And most likely, it will be granted and then the full District will overturn the 2-1 ruling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sullivan is a tool

As Judge Sullivan notes, he is forced to grant a motion he had "not yet resolved, based on alleged harms to a party that did not seek mandamus, and in reliance on arguments never presented to the district court."

As such, totally predictable and normal he would ask for this review. And most likely, it will be granted and then the full District will overturn the 2-1 ruling.

[Anonymous]

Turley is disingenuous. He's not surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. It proves that Sullivan is focused on justice.
Good for him.

Do you mean the justice of exculpatory evidence not being shared with thf defendant?

Nope. Not talking fairy tales. I’m talking about holding a confessed traitor to account.

DP. What traitorous activities did he confess to?

He was on Turkey’s payroll while he was NSA for the US.