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

[Anonymous]

Fun times

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

And appointed to the Federal bench by Clinton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

Illegal? Nope. Highly partisan and exposing? Yep. To try and charge Flynn with contempt? Ridiculous.

Sullivan is trying to push Trump into a pardon. Problem is, in doing so, he is exposing his own bias. Choosing Gleeson?

Gleeson's op-ed proves how bias Sullivan is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

And appointed to the Federal bench by Clinton.

Nice Op-Ed that was published by the WSJ, but since there's a paywall:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/gjc7t3/wsj_editorial_board_judge_sullivans_bad_judgment/

And interesting thought in the article:

This is a criminal case subject to normal rules of evidence that were clearly violated by Mr. Mueller’s prosecutorial team. Our friends at the New York Sun speculate that Judge Sullivan may want to keep the prosecution going for months so a Biden Justice Department could revive it. We hope that’s wrong, though we do recall that Judge Sullivan some months back in open court asked prosecutors if Mr. Flynn might have been charged with “treason.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

Illegal? Nope. Highly partisan and exposing? Yep. To try and charge Flynn with contempt? Ridiculous.

Sullivan is trying to push Trump into a pardon. Problem is, in doing so, he is exposing his own bias. Choosing Gleeson?

Gleeson's op-ed proves how bias Sullivan is.

Do you know who Gleeson is? Doesn't sound like it.

Before calling people partisan and biased, know who they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

And appointed to the Federal bench by Clinton.

Nice Op-Ed that was published by the WSJ, but since there's a paywall:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/gjc7t3/wsj_editorial_board_judge_sullivans_bad_judgment/

And interesting thought in the article:

This is a criminal case subject to normal rules of evidence that were clearly violated by Mr. Mueller’s prosecutorial team. Our friends at the New York Sun speculate that Judge Sullivan may want to keep the prosecution going for months so a Biden Justice Department could revive it. We hope that’s wrong, though we do recall that Judge Sullivan some months back in open court asked prosecutors if Mr. Flynn might have been charged with “treason.”

That opinion has a lot of nonsense in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

Illegal? Nope. Highly partisan and exposing? Yep. To try and charge Flynn with contempt? Ridiculous.

Sullivan is trying to push Trump into a pardon. Problem is, in doing so, he is exposing his own bias. Choosing Gleeson?

Gleeson's op-ed proves how bias Sullivan is.

Do you know who Gleeson is? Doesn't sound like it.

Before calling people partisan and biased, know who they are.

I do. The fact you are taking things in this direction says I'm right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

Illegal? Nope. Highly partisan and exposing? Yep. To try and charge Flynn with contempt? Ridiculous.

Sullivan is trying to push Trump into a pardon. Problem is, in doing so, he is exposing his own bias. Choosing Gleeson?

Gleeson's op-ed proves how bias Sullivan is.

And Barr's "job inerview" op-ed?

Really, you can game this out as much as you want, Neither Gleason nor Sullivan are partisan hacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

And appointed to the Federal bench by Clinton.

Nice Op-Ed that was published by the WSJ, but since there's a paywall:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/gjc7t3/wsj_editorial_board_judge_sullivans_bad_judgment/

And interesting thought in the article:

This is a criminal case subject to normal rules of evidence that were clearly violated by Mr. Mueller’s prosecutorial team. Our friends at the New York Sun speculate that Judge Sullivan may want to keep the prosecution going for months so a Biden Justice Department could revive it. We hope that’s wrong, though we do recall that Judge Sullivan some months back in open court asked prosecutors if Mr. Flynn might have been charged with “treason.”

That opinion has a lot of nonsense in it.

It shows some serious bias and points to who Sullivan is and what he's doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

And appointed to the Federal bench by Clinton.

Nice Op-Ed that was published by the WSJ, but since there's a paywall:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/gjc7t3/wsj_editorial_board_judge_sullivans_bad_judgment/

And interesting thought in the article:

This is a criminal case subject to normal rules of evidence that were clearly violated by Mr. Mueller’s prosecutorial team. Our friends at the New York Sun speculate that Judge Sullivan may want to keep the prosecution going for months so a Biden Justice Department could revive it. We hope that’s wrong, though we do recall that Judge Sullivan some months back in open court asked prosecutors if Mr. Flynn might have been charged with “treason.”

That opinion has a lot of nonsense in it.

It shows some serious bias and points to who Sullivan is and what he's doing.

No, it's got a lot of facts wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

And appointed to the Federal bench by Clinton.

Nice Op-Ed that was published by the WSJ, but since there's a paywall:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/gjc7t3/wsj_editorial_board_judge_sullivans_bad_judgment/

And interesting thought in the article:

This is a criminal case subject to normal rules of evidence that were clearly violated by Mr. Mueller’s prosecutorial team. Our friends at the New York Sun speculate that Judge Sullivan may want to keep the prosecution going for months so a Biden Justice Department could revive it. We hope that’s wrong, though we do recall that Judge Sullivan some months back in open court asked prosecutors if Mr. Flynn might have been charged with “treason.”

That opinion has a lot of nonsense in it.

Yeah, the WSJ is running out of ways to spin it.

Either Flynn lied to the FBI or he lied to the judge. The DOJ argument that his lie wasn't "material" was the dumbest argument ever since the judge ALREADY found that the lie was material.

It's obvious to all that Barr is doing this because Trump wants Flynn free, but Trump is too much of a coward to pardon him. It was also super dumb to try this crap with Judge Sullivan - he's fearless and will do what needs to be done to get to the bottom of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is Sullivan a judge? I believe he is.

Of course he is a judge. Appointed by Reagan and elevated by Bush. He is about as much of a straight shooter as there is. What evidence do you have that he has done something illegal or outside of the bounds of normal judicial activity? And if you are going to levy such a claim, please describe AG Barr's actions and how they compare to ANY of his predecessors over the last 75 years.

And appointed to the Federal bench by Clinton.

Nice Op-Ed that was published by the WSJ, but since there's a paywall:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/gjc7t3/wsj_editorial_board_judge_sullivans_bad_judgment/

And interesting thought in the article:

This is a criminal case subject to normal rules of evidence that were clearly violated by Mr. Mueller’s prosecutorial team. Our friends at the New York Sun speculate that Judge Sullivan may want to keep the prosecution going for months so a Biden Justice Department could revive it. We hope that’s wrong, though we do recall that Judge Sullivan some months back in open court asked prosecutors if Mr. Flynn might have been charged with “treason.”

That opinion has a lot of nonsense in it.

It shows some serious bias and points to who Sullivan is and what he's doing.

No, it's got a lot of facts wrong.

What facts are wrong?

[Anonymous]

In a surprise to no one, it turns out that the only one using unmasking as a political weapon is the dirtbag Trump.

I think we can safely say that pretty much all the gop accusations about impropriety are projection. Flynn is a crook and a liar. Donald was warned about him, to his face, by Obama. I guess given Donald’s personality disorders he was always going to do what President Obama told him not to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In a surprise to no one, it turns out that the only one using unmasking as a political weapon is the dirtbag Trump.

I think we can safely say that pretty much all the gop accusations about impropriety are projection. Flynn is a crook and a liar. Donald was warned about him, to his face, by Obama. I guess given Donald’s personality disorders he was always going to do what President Obama told him not to do.

Linked upthread:

In a briefing with reporters, Alex Joel, the office’s chief civil liberties officer, cautioned against reading too much into statistical fluctuations, but said that one factor in the surge of unmaskings was that a handful of reports in 2018 contained numerous identifiers of Americans or American businesses that malicious hackers abroad had targeted.

“That could be an important factor in explaining the number here,” Mr. Joel said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/us/politics/nsa...kings-surveillance-report.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In a surprise to no one, it turns out that the only one using unmasking as a political weapon is the dirtbag Trump.

I think we can safely say that pretty much all the gop accusations about impropriety are projection. Flynn is a crook and a liar. Donald was warned about him, to his face, by Obama. I guess given Donald’s personality disorders he was always going to do what President Obama told him not to do.

How many anti-Trump partisan hacks still worked in the WH those years