quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Federal judge hires high-powered D.C. attorney to defend his actions in Flynn case

I wonder what the weather is like back on Earth these days.

Makes one wonder how many times a Federal Judge has hired a lawyer to defend his actions in a case.

Simply the fact that a Judge needs a lawyer to defend his actions in a court case smacks at admission of wrong doing.

There's a lot riding on this and it's not just what Flynn did or was accused of doing.

Anyone have any insight on "Hammer" and Clappers involvement? I don't think I've heard of it before and it's sort of "conspiracy theory" territory.

I don't understand how a Federal Judge can appropriate taxpayer money for this. He is getting a private law firm to deliver his opinion to an Appellate Court. I bet anything it is not coming out of his pocket.

Andy McCarthy:

What is Judge Sullivan thinking? A judge tells Court of Appeals he needs a lawyer to represent him on his management and rulings in a case? Where outcome, whether he likes it or not, is obvious under Circuit precedent? Are plaudits for anti-Trump cred worth his reputation?

He’s totally entitled to fume on the record that Flynn looked him in the eye and swore that he lied, that Flynn’s erratic litigation strategy caused the court needless effort, and that he thinks DOJ is wrong. But the law requires him to grant the dismissal. Do your job

Sen Cotton:

Judge Sullivan is supposed to be neutral arbiter.

But he hired a high-powered defense attorney to justify his bizarre attempt to force Flynn's prosecution.

How can Sullivan judge this case when at this point, he's effectively a participant?

Many people have speculated that Sullivan is trying to drag this out in the hopes that a Biden administration will continue the prosecution but that makes no sense. The election is in November and the inauguration is in January. Plenty of time for Trump to pardon Flynn if it becomes necessary. I also don't think Sullivan has decide to go down this route on his own, that the Flynn case bothers him so much he is willing to sacrifice his reputation and accept any repercussions that may result. His actions during this case have just tracked too closely with the "resistance" ideas that have been put fourth in op-ed columns since the beginning. He could be auditioning for a higher judgeship appointment from a future administration.

I hope the appeals court slaps him and his conduct down HARD. And I hope Flynn has a good case for damages deriving from the malicious prosecution.

If there’s a political motive behind the judge’s actions, drawing out the drama and keeping it in the public eye is more than enough reason for what he’s doing. Even if the President ultimately decided to pardon Flynn that could easily be spun as, “See: He was guilty anyway and only got off because of politics. The judge was doing the right thing in not dropping the case.” And I still believe he may be eyeing a future move up to a higher position in the judiciary. A future Democrat president probably won’t care in the least that he manipulated the system to make things harder on the defendant as long as the case serves to embarrass the Administration and give the left, including the BS media, something to keep talking about.

quote:

Anyone have any insight on "Hammer" and Clappers involvement? I don't think I've heard of it before and it's sort of "conspiracy theory" territory.

The Hammer (or HAMR) is definitely real. Google Dennis Montgomery, he created the system and tried to tell the FBI it was being abused for domestic spying. Comey swept it under the rug. Plenty of information on it around the interwebs. He swears that clapper and Brennan were running wild with it, totally unhinged.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/...er-russia-fox-nation

Michael Flynn's lawyer says Robert Mueller prosecuted her client to further Russian collusion hoax

The attorney for former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is alleging that former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team pursued Flynn's prosecution solely to prolong its investigation of President Trump.

"It should never have been prosecuted," Flynn lawyer Sidney Powell said in a special new episode of Fox Nation's "Witch Hunt." The episode, hosted by Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, will first air Sunday evening on the Fox News Channel.

"Mueller knew from Day One that the Russia hoax was blown to bits," she said. "They all knew that. They knew ... the 'Steele Dossier' -- all of that was an absolute hoax. The only way they could keep the Mueller investigation going was to create the obstruction hoax."

"It was simply the pressure and the machinations of the special counsel operation that insisted on prosecuting Gen. Flynn because they needed to keep the obstruction hoax alive against the president," she said.

Mueller has not responded publicly to the allegations or Republican efforts to investigate the actions of his team.

In a previous episode of "Witch Hunt," Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, pledged to file new criminal referrals related to the Mueller team's conduct.

"We're looking into everything that happened with Mueller," he told Jarrett. "We already know what happened with Gen. Flynn is clearly corruption at the highest level. He should have never been prosecuted."

"Fast forward a couple of months in May of 2017, Bob Mueller is appointed," pressed Jarrett. "The dossier had been debunked as a fabrication -- debunked by the FBI. And Mueller is nevertheless appointed."

"[Mueller] receives the FBI files," he continued. "When he read those shouldn't he have walked over to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's office and said, 'Wait a minute, you've got no evidence here. My appointment is illegitimate and in violation of the special counsel regulation.' Shouldn't he have done that?"

"Well, it's even way worse than that," Nunes said. "Mueller walks in the door and says, 'Hey, where are the Russians? Where's all these Russians that were communicating and coordinating with the Trump campaign?'

"There are no Russians. There's nothing they don't have, Jack," he said. "And in fact, all the documentation that's now come forward, it's clear they didn't have anything... they didn't have anything from Flynn to all 17 agencies that gave all their information up. They had zero, zippo, nothing. So what the hell was Mueller doing?"




above seen at CTH

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

MONTGOMERY, ‘THE HAMMER’ SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM WHISTLEBLOWER, BECAME THE DEEP STATE’S ENEMY NUMBER ONE AFTER EXPOSING THE TRUTH

Good reading on Dennis Mongomery and The Hammer

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Andy McCarthy:

What is Judge Sullivan thinking? A judge tells Court of Appeals he needs a lawyer to represent him on his management and rulings in a case? Where outcome, whether he likes it or not, is obvious under Circuit precedent? Are plaudits for anti-Trump cred worth his reputation?

He’s totally entitled to fume on the record that Flynn looked him in the eye and swore that he lied, that Flynn’s erratic litigation strategy caused the court needless effort, and that he thinks DOJ is wrong. But the law requires him to grant the dismissal. Do your job

Sen Cotton:

Judge Sullivan is supposed to be neutral arbiter.

But he hired a high-powered defense attorney to justify his bizarre attempt to force Flynn's prosecution.

How can Sullivan judge this case when at this point, he's effectively a participant?

He's on the bench for life. It doesn't matter what he does. It doesn't matter what he says. Even if, and it's a huge if, he were to get kicked off the bench he'd wind up on the board of directors at some corporation, or in a law firm that does DEM bidding. He'll make a half mil a year (or more), plus his judicial retirement. He'll be well taken care of for his "bravery" in this matter.

https://twitter.com/CBS_Herrid...553609973760/photo/1

I hope President Trump finds another good spot for Richard Grenell.

Maybe Chris Wray should take a position as ambassador to some middle east country and let Grenell clean house at the FBI.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Andy McCarthy:

What is Judge Sullivan thinking? A judge tells Court of Appeals he needs a lawyer to represent him on his management and rulings in a case? Where outcome, whether he likes it or not, is obvious under Circuit precedent? Are plaudits for anti-Trump cred worth his reputation?

He’s totally entitled to fume on the record that Flynn looked him in the eye and swore that he lied, that Flynn’s erratic litigation strategy caused the court needless effort, and that he thinks DOJ is wrong. But the law requires him to grant the dismissal. Do your job

Sen Cotton:

Judge Sullivan is supposed to be neutral arbiter.

But he hired a high-powered defense attorney to justify his bizarre attempt to force Flynn's prosecution.

How can Sullivan judge this case when at this point, he's effectively a participant?

He's on the bench for life. It doesn't matter what he does. It doesn't matter what he says. Even if, and it's a huge if, he were to get kicked off the bench he'd wind up on the board of directors at some corporation, or in a law firm that does DEM bidding. He'll make a half mil a year (or more), plus his judicial retirement. He'll be well taken care of for his "bravery" in this matter.

Peppermint.

Has Sullivan pulled out the race card, yet?

didn't want to start a new thread

Sidney Powell has a new book

"Conviction Machine: Standing Up to Federal Prosecutorial Abuse"

I'm just going to post a link to this story.

It is an article by Benjamin Wittes.
Wittes is as big a pile of dog crap as you will find.

He argues how Judge Sullivan is doing the right thing. Ben Wittes - friend of Jim Comey.

https://www.theatlantic.com/id...ichael-flynn/612067/

Writing in the ATLANTIC which has had numerous attack articles against President Trump. Scum bags and liars

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


diff topic:

Techno Fog reports:

Beth Wilkinson formally files her entry of appearance for Judge Sullivan.


seen as a comment at Techno Fog twitter:

."Judge Sullivan, to help with your verdict, would you like to poll the audience or phone a friend?"

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:
< letter to Warner >

I doubt Warner, or any member of Congress for that matter, has ever received a letter that blunt from the Executive Branch.

I love it. There should be much more of it.

https://theconservativetreehou...-1000am/#more-192877

Rod Rosenstein to testify to Senate Judiciary Comm on 3 June 10am

Sen Graham is the chair. I wish it was still Sen Grassley

mtg title:

Oversight of the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation: Day 1

only witness listed is Rosenstein