What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Trump and the FBI (4 Viewers)

Sullivan is now questioning Mooppan and Kohl about what would happen if he denied the motion to dismiss the case. Kohl says Flynn's motion to withdraw his guilty plea is still pending, and that such motions are typically treated "liberally" pre-sentencing

Mooppan then says there would be no prosecutor in the Flynn case, since DOJ does not wish to pursue it, and he argues there is no previous case where a fed court has been allowed to appoint a private prosecutor outside of the contempt context

DOJ is doing their very best to set Flynn free.  Trump will be proud.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Flynn's already been prosecuted, he just needs to be sentenced. That's totally in the courts' purview.
Click to expand...
So, there's no need for a prosecutor any more.  Flynn pled guilty and was found guilty and now awaits sentencing.  What would the prosecutor typically do at this point?  Advocate for the harshest punishment possible?

 
I appreciate Sullivan doing all this and highlighting the corruption.

But I reckon he will ultimately dismiss the case. Not sure he has much choice.

But at least he will shine a light on this crap before he does so.

 
Well - DOJ is suggesting its not that simple.  If the case is not dismissed, Flynn will move to withdraw his guilty plea, and DOJ won't oppose, and won't prosecute.

 
whoknew said:
But I reckon he will ultimately dismiss the case. Not sure he has much choice.
Click to expand...
This is the compromise:

Gleeson in response to question from Sullivan starting with whether granting the motion to dismiss should be done with or without prejudice.

The retired judge says Rule 48(a) makes clear it should be without prejudice.

For the lay listeners - if Sullivan dismisses "without prejudice" - the charges could be brought again in the future.  Conversely, dismissing "with prejudice" would bar the Government from bringing these charges - say, under a Biden Administration.

 
Sinn Fein said:
Well - DOJ is suggesting its not that simple.  If the case is not dismissed, Flynn will move to withdraw his guilty plea, and DOJ won't oppose, and won't prosecute.
Click to expand...
You can withdraw your guilty plea after being found guilty and awaiting sentencing?  Why not do it after sentencing?  Just get a re-do if you don't like the outcome.

If judgement has been handed down, that seems like the breaking point to me.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Couple thoughts, Z & SF:

  1. Defendants try to withdraw guilty pleas, it happens, but courts don't have to let them. Usually there are harsh penalties.
  2. There is almost no other situation like this anywhere but as I understand it once the defendant has passed into sentencing phase it's now the court's baby, not DOJ's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Eta, that doesn't mean Sullivan won't dismiss it, but he can keep them hanging around while he makes them flush out what he asks them to until he rules.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Eta, that doesn't mean Sullivan won't dismiss it, but he can keep them hanging around while he makes them flush out what he asks them to until he rules.
Click to expand...
If they hoist themselves by their own petard so badly and he dismisses without prejudice, that just gives the next go at Flynn lots of ammo. 

 
Gleeson expresses incredulity about what's happened in Flynn's case, saying the judge should definitely give a lot of weight to Trump's tweets about Flynn's case and arguing that the only explanation for how this has all unfolded is that Barr yielded to pressure from Trump

Gleeson twice reads AG Barr's statement that Trump's tweets "make it impossible to do my job and to assure the courts and the prosecutors in the department that we are doing our work with integrity.”

 
This all kind of fascinating - watching DOJ and Flynn squirm.  But it is also a waste of judicial resources, DOJ resources, and Flynn's own attorney fees (which I assume are being paid by someone else).

Sentence him.

Pardon him.

Stop wasting everyone's time.

 
Sinn Fein said:
Do you have a link from "the other" side?

I don't even know what "the other" side might be - truth?
Click to expand...
That's part of what they're saying. Not an attorney, so I might be easily influenced by what sounds like some good arguments. 

>>Kohl (who is doing a great job) says that factually the record is different now than then when Sullivan ruled. He points to questions that Sullivan asked at the sentencing hearing. He says what matters is "what is actually true."<<

 
SoBeDad said:
That's part of what they're saying. Not an attorney, so I might be easily influenced by what sounds like some good arguments. 

>>Kohl (who is doing a great job) says that factually the record is different now than then when Sullivan ruled. He points to questions that Sullivan asked at the sentencing hearing. He says what matters is "what is actually true."<<
Click to expand...
But the take away message for me is that the case was discussed with Trump. How unusual is that?

 
SoBeDad said:
That's part of what they're saying. Not an attorney, so I might be easily influenced by what sounds like some good arguments. 

>>Kohl (who is doing a great job) says that factually the record is different now than then when Sullivan ruled. He points to questions that Sullivan asked at the sentencing hearing. He says what matters is "what is actually true."<<
Click to expand...
Isn't what's "actually true" is that Fylnn lied to the FBI and then admitted to doing so in court, under oath?

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
And today - Comey is testifying before Senate Intel.... wheeee....
Click to expand...
What Comey did as the head of the FBI should be of interest to all of us.  Comey was without a doubt biased in doing his job.  Nobody really cares because he was aniti-Trump but we should.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile Tremblay said:
By the way, did anyone watch the miniseries on Showtime? Was it any good?
Click to expand...
I watched it. It was okay, it felt like an Aaron Sorkin production. The gist was Trump's belief that the FBI and Comey personally worked at his behest. The same sentiment applied to the Attorney General. Any act that deviated from that belief was considered a betrayal. 

Trump came off like a wannabe Mob boss, possessing the impulse control of Sonny, and the intellect of Fredo. Brendan Gleeson did  a good job of conveying both traits. 

Jeff Daniels is a bit fleshy in the face to accurately portray Comey physically (George Clooney would have been a natural), but he gets the mannerisms down pretty good. Comey admittedly possesses a self-righteous holier-than-thou demeanor, and Daniels gets it across very well. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
GordonGekko
NBC News Chuck Todd On Solving Trump For POTUS 2024 - "The Only Answer Is Death" ( 7/11/22 17:52 PST)
Replies
20
Views
666
Captain Cranks
Captain Cranks
GordonGekko
MSM Silent As Drunk Driver Released After Killing Teenager He Falsely Accused Of Being A "Republican Extremist" (10/4/22 16:34 PST)
2 3
Replies
111
Views
3K
squistion
squistion

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Top