• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mueller Investigation pt4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Belz... said:
It's amazing how much loyalty someone with no concept of loyalty can command. Plus he has no ideology and no plan, no beliefs or convictions, etc. That's unusual, I think.
Click to expand...

It's also amazing how a cult of personality could arise around such an obnoxious personality, but there it is.
 
The Big Dog said:
I don't agree with everything in this analysis, but man did he nail Sullivan's hide to the wall:

“My decisions cannot be questioned by you: I'm always right! And my wise discretion is never abused—for all of my life!”
Click to expand...

Federal judges are famous for their tirades, that's for sure. Lifetime appointment is a hell of a drug.

I don't see the Flynn dressing down as bullying. You can't plead guilty and go around professing your innocence. Flynn was trying to have it both ways and the judge called him on it. Delaying the sentencing was a mercy, because based on the way Flynn has been acting, leniency at this moment was not likely.
 
The Big Dog said:
Sigh, it was literally a simple yes or no question...

28 USC 455

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
Click to expand...

Ah, if a judge decides a defendant is guilty, he must immediately recuse himself?
 
The Big Dog said:
Sigh, it was literally a simple yes or no question...

28 USC 455

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
Click to expand...


HELLO, MCFLY! The General plead guilty! Judging a guilty defendant is his damn job. That he was disgusted with the General's crime doesn't make him impartial or biased against the defendant.
 
WilliamSeger said:
Ah, if a judge decides a defendant is guilty, he must immediately recuse himself?
Click to expand...

And the judge didn't really do that, the defendant did. This is without a doubt the dumbest and most inane arguments I've ever heard. The judge is supposed to recuse himself from a court case where both the defense and the government agree?

WTH?
 
The Big Dog said:
Sigh, it was literally a simple yes or no question...

28 USC 455

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
Click to expand...

And yet you thought it would be a good idea to give some context for that question right here.
 
The Big Dog said:
The Rule of Ah So! :D

I of course did not say anything remotely like that, but rather was focusing on the false claims about working for turkey while NSA, the reference to treason, etc. as detailed in my posts and in the article I linked to.

This is obvious, yet I have to respond to...

Oh well.
Click to expand...

The judge took that back and you know it. And in fact apologized for saying it and thanked the government for correcting him. There is no reason to believe that his misunderstanding affects his final ruling. That the judge thanked the government attorneys for correcting him clearly shows he is not biased. Had, the judge stuck to his previous position, then you might have an argument for bias.

But because the judge graciously didn't, you don't.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
The judge took that back and you know it. And in fact apologized for saying it and thanked the government for correcting him. There is no reason to believe that his misunderstanding affects his final ruling. That the judge thanked the government attorneys for correcting him clearly shows he is not biased. Had, the judge stuck to his previous position, then you might have an argument for bias.

But because the judge graciously didn't, you don't.
Click to expand...

No, no, no. The judge said something against the defendant once. Ergo he is completely biased forever and a Clinton plant.
 
Belz... said:
No, no, no. The judge said something against the defendant once. Ergo he is completely biased forever and a Clinton plant.
Click to expand...

And here's the biggest problem with his argument. I guarantee that neither the Defense or the Government wants the judge to recuse himself. That conspiracy theorists in the cheap seats wants the judge to recuse himself is irrelevant.

All I can say to TBD about his latest ridiculous argument is, 'Good luck with that'.
 
The Big Dog said:
The Rule of Ah So! :D

I of course did not say anything remotely like that, but rather was focusing on the false claims about working for turkey while NSA, the reference to treason, etc. as detailed in my posts and in the article I linked to.

This is obvious, yet I have to respond to...

Oh well.
Click to expand...

Sullivan's refernce to treason is NOTHING that the judge should recuse himself over, given the reason he was doing so that I detailed above, and which you have ignored. Sullivan was NOT accusing Flynn of treason.

Just because the words treason and Flynn occur in the same sentence does not mean that Flynn was accused of treason.
 
The Big Dog said:
From the Code of Judicial Conduct for Federal Judges. Judge Sullivan should recuse himself after his tirade yesterday.

Amen brother!

How can you try to unring the bell when you threw an accusation like treason on the ******* table?

Outrageous.
Click to expand...
Making a mistake - saying that Flynn had worked for Turkey while NSA - and correcting that mistake is not being biased.

Asking if the government had thought about charging Flynn with treason in order to gauge how much the government was giving Flynn (by not charging him with treason if that was a possibility in the government's opinion) is not being biased.

So where exactly is the bias?
 
Paul2 said:
Sullivan's refernce to treason is NOTHING that the judge should recuse himself over, given the reason he was doing so that I detailed above, and which you have ignored. Sullivan was NOT accusing Flynn of treason.

Just because the words treason and Flynn occur in the same sentence does not mean that Flynn was accused of treason.
Click to expand...

There are posters here who tend to rearrange the words in a sentence to make it say what they want it to.

My request from yesterday to provide the quotes from the hearing that accuse Flynn of treason has been ignored.
 
WilliamSeger said:
Ah, so, then you realize now how absurd your recusal suggestion was?
Click to expand...

The Big Dog said:
I think one will find that living within an echo chamber can be quite boring.

The Big Dog thinks Sullivan should recuse himself and has cited various reasons, as well as citations to the law and the opinions of lawyers to bolster my position.

As far as I can tell, the response to my simple question have been borderline outrage that i would ask such a question.

Oh well, TDS is reality folks.
Click to expand...


As always, you flatter yourself. Amusement is not "outrage."
 
Indeed. It's come to that. At best, the judge demonstrated a poor understanding of the case that prevents him from being able to formulate an appropriate sentence for the defendant. At worst, he showed #bias sufficient to cause his recusal from the case. #Flynn

Another "legal beagle" chimes in with astute analysis.

here is another good point:

Can't walk it back. As the defense lawyer, I will be obligated to move for the judge's recusal to protect myself. A poor (even lawful) sentence may result in an appeal, and the issue may come up why didn't counsel ask for recusal? No tactical response will be sufficient.
Click to expand...

Flynn should dump Covington because there ain't no way those silk stocking lawyers have the stones to ask Sullivan to do the right thing.

Justice for Flynn.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom