Appeals court denies Michael Flynn and Justice Department's effort to end his case

[pamak]

Not necessarily-- the objective could be to trap Flynn in a lie, and the FBI agents concluded it was unsuccessful.
But I am not particularly making that claim. I am just saying the agents did not think he lied.




Yes-- and the totality of the evidence leads the DOJ to conclude they would not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the charges.



The expulsions are mentioned, not the economic sanctions.
I get the argument-- expelling diplomats and closing down weekend retreats can be loosely be described as sanctions.
But--- this is a criminal trial. So the description matters.. Particularly since the thinking was that the discussion had to do with a quid pro quo with the oligarchs who were impacted by the economic sanctions.




As above-- describing the expulsions as 'sanctions' can be reasonable.
And see above







The FBI agents were the only witnesses to what was said.

Answering in order

That is not what Barr says, so you make up conversations

My point is that The totality of the evidence is NOT used by the FBI AGENT of the the interviiew who thinks that Flynn did not lie lied, because such conversation takes place before the discovery of ALL available evidence including evidence from Trump transition team members who were briefed by Flynn. So, Barr cannot use SUCH evidence to talk about any conclusions based on the totality of evidence!

AGAIN, sanctions are NOT JUST ECONOMIC MEASURES!

Read the transcripts yo actually linked. The Russian ambassador talks also about the sanctions on Russian intelligence services. So, expulsions of suspected Russian agents and suctions of Russian intelligence services cannot be separated logically. Nor does Barr try to make a claim that Flynn talked only about expulsions. You just make things up!

As above

The FBI and most investigating agents form opinion based on ALL EVIDENCE which for the most part are related to events that happened without their presence. This is true from investigating a murder to investigating a counter-intelligence threat like Flynn.

 

[pamak]

I am saying there is no basis for believing a "corrupt" intent by Barr.




The claim was made that Barr was trying to get Trump's friends out of legal jeopardy.
The charges against Stone were never dropped and Barr himself called the prosecution of him "righteous."



In January, the prosecutor withdrew their sentencing agreement with Flynn. At that point, Flynn fired his lawyer and hired the current.
It was also at this time when Barr directed the St. Lous DA to review the case.

I am not interested in what you believe. I am only interested in the arguments you make in your beliefs.


No logic in your evidence! When Barr chooses to recommend a lighter sentence, after Trump starting tweeting about it, this does not mean that Barr does not show favoritism because he did not drop the charges. You must be aware of the concept of magnitude and scale, right? And again, why are you brining Ston to the conversation when I did not make ant claim related to his case. You are talking with me so you need to address what I am brining to the conversation.

Last part requires a bigger response. So:

In January, the prosecutor withdrew their sentencing agreement with Flynn. At that point, Flynn fired his lawyer and hired the current.
It was also at this time when Barr directed the St. Lous DA to review the case.

You do not know the whole story!

You have messed up the dates and the sequence of events. Flynn chose to not honor the plea agreement much earlier by not testifying in court against people who were also caught for not registering as foreign agents. And he had then new lawyers

Michael Flynn won't testify against former business partner, will be designated co-conspirator | TheHill

Michael Flynn won't testify against former business partner, will be designated co-conspirator


Flynn was never charged in connection with the Turkish lobbying campaign, but admitted to making false statements in FARA filings as part of a deal to cooperate with special counsel Robert Mueller.


Sidney Powell, Flynn’s attorney, told The Hill...

Notice that the story is from mid-2019 when the DOJ still pressed with the case. At that time Flynn had already changed his legal team

Sydney Powell was new lawyer Flynn got and it was with this lawyer when Flynn started changing strategy including not cooperating with the prosecutors.

The same lawyer (Sydney Powell) handled Flynn's motion in 2020

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

AUGUST 11 2020

A three-judge panel in June from the Washington appeals court previously granted a motion by Sydney Powell, Mr Flynn’s lawyer, to order Mr Sullivan to dismiss the case

So, my point which was based on the evidence from the legal journal I posted in previous post remains: Just because Flynn had a change of heart, it does snot mean that he has the legal right to withdraw the plea deal without convincing the judge

 

[pamak]

The appellate court said Sullivan has to make the decision.
The only decision to be made is to drop the charges.

Have you actually read the decision?

Here are some excerpts from the concurring opinion by Griffith, who is the judge appointed by BUSH!

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7048987/Flynn-Opinion-2020-08-31.pdf

Page 19-20 in the document

...we are aware of no case in which a court of appeals has ordered a district judge to decide a pending motion in a particular way.

 

[Tangmo]

Have you actually read the decision?

Here are some excerpts from the concurring opinion by Griffith, who is the judge appointed by BUSH!

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7048987/Flynn-Opinion-2020-08-31.pdf

Page 19-20 in the document

...we are aware of no case in which a court of appeals has ordered a district judge to decide a pending motion in a particular way.

You are reading a technically failed post that misrepresents me.

It wrongly ascribes to me the statement by the poster Athanasius68 in a post by that poster, Athanasius68.

I posted of the technical failure in my post to the thread, #347.

I have not called the technical failure to the attention of DP admin or moderators because I believe they do read the posts for comprehension and should recognize the failure routinely as well as to read my post #347 specifically pointing out the technical failure, which is obvious.

 

[pamak]

You are reading a technically failed post that misrepresents me.

It wrongly ascribes to me the statement by the poster Athanasius68 in a post by that poster, Athanasius68.

I posted of the technical failure in my post to the thread, #347.

I have not called the technical failure to the attention of DP admin or moderators because I believe they do read the posts for comprehension and should recognize the failure routinely as well as to read my post #347 specifically pointing out the technical failure, which is obvious.

Just noticed the same problem you mentioned before.

When I hit "reply" it often chages the format and the posts attributes quotes to other people.It must be a glitch of the site's software.

I will fix the issue with a new post, and yes, I was addresing Athanasius!

 

[pamak]

Since I cannot edit the old #353 post, I make a new one with correct attribution of the quote

The appellate court said Sullivan has to make the decision.
The only decision to be made is to drop the charges.

Have you actually read the decision?

Here are some excerpts from the concurring opinion by Griffith, who is the judge appointed by BUSH!

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7048987/Flynn-Opinion-2020-08-31.pdf

Page 19-20 in the document

...we are aware of no case in which a court of appeals has ordered a district judge to decide a pending motion in a particular way.

 

[pamak]

By the way, now that I am going over it, it looks like that the issue is when people reply to messages that include the wrong format in Athanasius' quotes which they get after replying to Athanasius' posts. So, the problem continues with the reply.

There does not seem to be any problem when I reply to anybody else's posts as long as he has not replied before to Athanasius.

Notice by the way (and I do not know if it is intentional or not) that the format of Athanasius replies does not trigger the notification function because his posts quote himself and not the person he addresses. So, one may be unaware that his post was replied by Athanasius.

Of course, if this is intentional, it is not going to work in this thread because few of us participate, so even if the notification does not work, one cannot successfully insert his reply in this thread without alerting the person he addresses

 

[pamak]

The formatting of your post is fractured and has flying components. The above for instance leads to your post being attributed to me myself as having said what you posted instead.

I've experienced this previously concerning your posts.

As in the past when this disturbance occurs, I shall not reply to your posts until the disorder is corrected.

Thank you for your cooperation, as the matter occurs occasionally rather than each time.

Notice what I said in the previous post:

His posts do not triigger the notification function in this forum because even though he quotes others, the format of his reply is changed and the end result has the effect of Athanasius quoting himself.

So, Athanasius must make it clear if he does this on purpose to avoid having his replies alerting the people he addresses so that he does not have to respond to their counterpoints.

If this is intentional, it is very lame and a sign that he is afraid of having a honest debate! In such case, Tangmo, your refusal to reply may be exactly what Athanasius wish to happen whenever he addresses your posts with replies that have the wrong format.

 

[Tangmo]

Notice what I said in the previous post:

His posts do not triigger the notification function in this forum because even though he quotes others, the format of his reply is changed and the end result has the effect of Athanasius quoting himself.

So, Athanasius must make it clear if he does this on purpose to avoid having his replies alerting the people he addresses so that he does not have to respond to their counterpoints.

If this is intentional, it is very lame and a sign that he is afraid of having a honest debate! In such case, Tangmo, your refusal to reply may be exactly what Athanasius wish to happen whenever he addresses your posts with replies that have the wrong format.

Yes indeed and it is a failure of the website to recognize this and to address it, to include the fact it has been occurring long before the change of format.

I've pointed out this technical failure in my posts as it has occurred previously yet it continues, and in the Flynn threads only, as best as I recall.

If we were posting to ourselves only without admin or mod supervision that would be one thing, yet this Malarkey occurs at will by the poster Athanasius68, ie, whenever it seems he decides to do it and there is no recognition of it by DP nor is there any inquiry into it by DP. Not in the past when Athanasius does it nor does there seem to be any awareness of it or concern of it by DP presently.

The DP authorities seem oblivious of it despite my efforts, and now yours presently. DP being possibly manipulated in this way is not an encouraging matter.

 

[Tangmo]

Indeed, I'd hope to see some evidence the thread is being read and supervised.

 

[pamak]

Yes indeed and it is a failure of the website to recognize this and to address it, to include the fact it has been occurring long before the change of format.

I've pointed out this technical failure in my posts as it has occurred previously yet it continues, and in the Flynn threads only, as best as I recall.

If we were posting to ourselves only without admin or mod supervision that would be one thing, yet this Malarkey occurs at will by the poster Athanasius68, ie, whenever it seems he decides to do it and there is no recognition of it by DP nor is there any inquiry into it by DP. Not in the past when Athanasius does it nor does there seem to be any awareness of it or concern of it by DP presently.

The DP authorities seem oblivious of it despite my efforts, and now yours presently. DP being possibly manipulated in this way is not an encouraging matter.

The way I see it it applies whenever Athanasius posts (with wrong format) are part of the conversation. So, if Athnasius quotes me by using the wrong format and then I respond to him, my post will also have the wrong format ad misattribute quotes. And if in turn you respond to MY post (which has now the wrong format), your post will also get the wrong format and misapply the quotes in my post (which has already th wrong format). Notice the posts:

1 #343: https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...ts-effort-end-his-case-35.html#post1072632881

Athanasius uses the wrong format when he addresses you

2. #353: https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...ts-effort-end-his-case-36.html#post1072634832

I reply to Athanasius (even though his comments address you) but because of the wrong format of #343 post, my reply now has also the wrong format

2 #354: https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...ts-effort-end-his-case-36.html#post1072634951

You reply to my #353 post but now your reply also shows the wrong format because my post acquired the wrong format from Athanasius.

That is why you see the problem in this thread and not in other threads. Athanasius replies is the problem and the reply function by itself transfers the problem to others when they quote his posts without taking the extra step of fixing the format!

 

[Tangmo]

By the way, now that I am going over it, it looks like that the issue is when people reply to messages that include the wrong format in Athanasius' quotes which they get after replying to Athanasius' posts. So, the problem continues with the reply.

There does not seem to be any problem when I reply to anybody else's posts as long as he has not replied before to Athanasius.

Notice by the way (and I do not know if it is intentional or not) that the format of Athanasius replies does not trigger the notification function because his posts quote himself and not the person he addresses. So, one may be unaware that his post was replied by Athanasius.

Of course, if this is intentional, it is not going to work in this thread because few of us participate, so even if the notification does not work, one cannot successfully insert his reply in this thread without alerting the person he addresses

Yet DP seems to miss this.

Completely.

Every time by Athanasius68.

 

[pamak]

...

The DP authorities seem oblivious of it despite my efforts, and now yours presently. DP being possibly manipulated in this way is not an encouraging matter.

I think my #361 post gives a reasonable explanation of what is happening, and it is worth the effort to alert again the moderators. As I said, it looks like a cheap trick to have certain posts pass unnoticed by the person who is addressed, but the most important point here is that such tactic forces other participants to waste time fixing the problems that HIS post create or (as it happened with me until I saw your post) hit the reply button and acquire the same format problem which makes the whole conversation difficut to follow because the casual observant is confused about the origin of the quote.

I am waiting first to see what Athanasius has to say about all this, but count on me backing up your claims and complaints if I do not hear a reasonable response by the next day or two. And in that case, it is going to be me who will notify the moderators and flag his posts every time I see posts with wrong format that misatributtes quotes

 

[Tangmo]

I think my #361 post gives a reasonable explanation of what is happening, and it is worth the effort to alert again the moderators. As I said, it looks like a cheap trick to have certain posts pass unnoticed by the person who is addressed, but the most important point here is that such tactic forces other participants to waste time fixing the problems that HIS post create or (as it happened with me until I saw your post) hit the reply button and acquire the same format problem which makes the whole conversation difficut to follow because the casual observant is confused about the origin of the quote.

I am waiting first to see what Athanasius has to say about all this, but count on me backing up your claims and complaints if I do not hear a reasonable response by the next day or two. And in that case, it is going to be me who will notify the moderators and flag his posts every time I see posts with wrong format that misatributtes quotes

Good on you.

Each time however Athanasius68 does this he gets away with it when DP on its own should also recognize it, notice it and take action to explore it.

Yet they don't and never have done it.

One gets penalized for initiating a report that may not be accepted, which is why I don't make one.

 

[pamak]

Good on you.

Each time however Athanasius68 does this he gets away with it when DP on its own should also recognize it, notice it and take action to explore it.

Yet they don't and never have done it.

One gets penalized for initiating a report that may not be accepted, which is why I don't make one.

Perhaps if more posters start complaining about the same thing, it will change things.

 

[Tangmo]

Notice what I said in the previous post:

His posts do not triigger the notification function in this forum because even though he quotes others, the format of his reply is changed and the end result has the effect of Athanasius quoting himself.

So, Athanasius must make it clear if he does this on purpose to avoid having his replies alerting the people he addresses so that he does not have to respond to their counterpoints.

If this is intentional, it is very lame and a sign that he is afraid of having a honest debate! In such case, Tangmo, your refusal to reply may be exactly what Athanasius wish to happen whenever he addresses your posts with replies that have the wrong format.

True and Athanasius has succeeded at this repeatedly for some considerable time.

I have said to him directly for some period of time that I do not reply to his many mucked up posts and alleged replies that outright and blatantly misrepresent me.

Yet he continues in this tactic unrestrained or without any exploration by DP authorities as to what's obviously going on in his posts that misrepresent the poster.

 

[Athanasius68]

It is obvious Flynn is not charged of having dinner with Putin.

You refer of course to the RT anniversary dinner when Flynn was paid $40,000 to attend in Moscow and, not only sat at Putin's table, Flynn sat next to Putin.

I have pointed out many times Flynn knew Putin long before Trump ever met or interacted with Putin. While Trump had to become Potus to meet Putin, Flynn and Putin were BFF quickly after Flynn was required to retire from the Army. It is significant btw no Pentagon brass hats attended Flynn's bare bones retirement ceremony. This was despite Flynn being a 3-star and chief of Defense Intelligence Agency where Flynn created chaos. Sounds familiar to many of us over here, ie, a Putin operative in the USA creating chaos in his domain.

Ok-- Flynn was not popular with his fellow generals.
So there is a possibility he is a Russian agent.
Are you serious?

 

[Athanasius68]

My point is that The totality of the evidence is NOT used by the FBI AGENT of the the interviiew who thinks that Flynn did not lie lied, because such conversation takes place before the discovery of ALL available evidence including evidence from Trump transition team members who were briefed by Flynn. So, Barr cannot use SUCH evidence to talk about any conclusions based on the totality of evidence!

The FBI agents can only speak of what they know.
And they said they did not think Flynn lied.
That is part of the total evidence which the prosecutor has to consider.

AGAIN, sanctions are NOT JUST ECONOMIC MEASURES!

Yeah-- I get it.
But the rationale with regards to suspecting Flynn is not because of low level diplomats and a couple of weekend getaway places.
The concern was a quid pro quo with various Russian oligarchs and institutions who were targeted by the sanctions.
That wasn't discussed. So how does this show that Flynn might be a Russian agent? It doesn't.

Read the transcripts yo actually linked. The Russian ambassador talks also about the sanctions on Russian intelligence services. So, expulsions of suspected Russian agents and suctions of Russian intelligence services cannot be separated logically. Nor does Barr try to make a claim that Flynn talked only about expulsions. You just make things up!

Barr didn't go into the sanctions. He didn't have to.
But he could have.

The FBI and most investigating agents form opinion based on ALL EVIDENCE which for the most part are related to events that happened without their presence. This is true from investigating a murder to investigating a counter-intelligence threat like Flynn.

Yep-- and the lack of evidence to support the claim that Flynn was a Russian agent led the FBI to decide to close up shop.
Talking about not overreacting to expelling diplomats doesn't change that-- especially when the FBI director himself had no issue with the discussion.

 

[Athanasius68]

Have you actually read the decision?

Here are some excerpts from the concurring opinion by Griffith, who is the judge appointed by BUSH!

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7048987/Flynn-Opinion-2020-08-31.pdf

Page 19-20 in the document

...we are aware of no case in which a court of appeals has ordered a district judge to decide a pending motion in a particular way.

That's fine.
Dropping the charges is the only decision to make. As we all agree, the judiciary doe snot prosecute. Nor can they tell the prosecutor to prosecute.

 

[Athanasius68]

By the way, now that I am going over it, it looks like that the issue is when people reply to messages that include the wrong format in Athanasius' quotes which they get after replying to Athanasius' posts. So, the problem continues with the reply.

There does not seem to be any problem when I reply to anybody else's posts as long as he has not replied before to Athanasius.

Notice by the way (and I do not know if it is intentional or not) that the format of Athanasius replies does not trigger the notification function because his posts quote himself and not the person he addresses. So, one may be unaware that his post was replied by Athanasius.

Of course, if this is intentional, it is not going to work in this thread because few of us participate, so even if the notification does not work, one cannot successfully insert his reply in this thread without alerting the person he addresses

The glitch has been around for about six months or so. I have seen it sometimes with other posters.
Sometimes I catch it, and sometimes I don't and sometimes there is no issue.

 

[pamak]

The glitch has been around for about six months or so. I have seen it sometimes with other posters.
Sometimes I catch it, and sometimes I don't and sometimes there is no issue.

Notice what I said when other posters quote you. Then, if the format of your post is not correct their reply will produce a post with a wrong format. Up until now, I have not seen this issue with other posters who do not interact with your posts.

 

[pamak]

That's fine.
Dropping the charges is the only decision to make. As we all agree, the judiciary doe snot prosecute. Nor can they tell the prosecutor to prosecute.

The only thing that we can agree is that your claim regarding what Sullivan SHOULD do contradicts that of even the Bush-appointed judge who says that no Appeals Court has ordered any judge to decide a pending motion in a particular way.

And this post of your has also the wrong format

 

[pamak]

The FBI agents can only speak of what they know.
And they said they did not think Flynn lied.
That is part of the total evidence which the prosecutor has to consider.

You come to my words. If this is PART of the total evidence then Barr's claims are NOT based on the totality of evidence. He just tries to use conversations among FBI agents at a time when they did NOT know the whole evidence to make the misleading claim that such conversations nd debates somehow shows that Flynn did not lie. As I explained, the totality of the evidence shows clearly that Flynn lied and everybody (including senior Trump administrations of the transition team) came to the same conclusion. So, the opinion of an FBI agents at a time when he did not know the whole evidence is not a sign that Flynn did not lie. It is evidence that Flynn was a good liar.

Originally Posted by Athanasius68

Yeah-- I get it.
But the rationale with regards to suspecting Flynn is not because of low level diplomats and a couple of weekend getaway places.
The concern was a quid pro quo with various Russian oligarchs and institutions who were targeted by the sanctions.
That wasn't discussed. So how does this show that Flynn might be a Russian agent? It doesn't.

You confuse the different stages of the investigation. The red flag which led to the interview was what Pence and the Press Secretary said in public which contradicted the information the FBI agents had about the conversation between Flynn and the Russian ambassador. And that red flag was about the talks around the sanctions. Pence claimed that Flynn told him that he never discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador, and the FBI knew that Flynn DID discuss sanctions with the Russian ambassador. So, either Flynn "forgot" or he really forgot. So, the FBI had to investigate what was it!

Originally Posted by Athanasius68


Barr didn't go into the sanctions. He didn't have to.
But he could have.

You mean Flynn. When I am talking with a Russian ambassador who mentions the US sanctions on Russian intelligence agencies and when I am talking about the expulsions of Russians which the Obama adminstration suspected to be Russian agents, then If I answer a question by saying that the conversation I had with the Russian ambassador was not about the sanctions, I am lying.

Obama expels 35 Russian diplomats in retaliation for US election hacking | Obama administration | The Guardian

“I have issued an executive order that provides additional authority for responding to certain cyber activity that seeks to interfere with or undermine our election processes and institutions, or those of our allies or partners,” Obama said in the statement, released while he was vacationing with his family in Hawaii.

“Using this new authority, I have sanctioned nine entities and individuals: the GRU and the FSB, two Russian intelligence services; four individual officers of the GRU; and three companies that provided material support to the GRU’s cyber operations

The above, makes it obvious that one cannot pretend that the expulsions of the individuals are different thing from the sanctions!

Originally Posted by Athanasius68

Yep-- and the lack of evidence to support the claim that Flynn was a Russian agent led the FBI to decide to close up shop.
Talking about not overreacting to expelling diplomats doesn't change that-- especially when the FBI director himself had no issue with the discussion.

No, it did not lead to any such decision. You make things up. They were debating if they should continue or not the investigation when they heard the public comments by the press Secretary and Pence asserting that Flynn told them that he did not discuss sanctions wiht the Russian ambassador. JUST this piece of NEW evidence was enough to justify investigating if and why Flynn chose to misrepresent the conversation to Pence. And even if the case had been closed, JUST this piece of NEW at the time evidence, could be enough to reopen the case! And again, not even Barr dares to say in his motion to dismiss the case that talking about the expulsions of Russian intelligence (GRU) officials is not the same with talking about the sactions that the Obama administration imposed on the Russian intelligence services (GRU)!

 

[Tangmo]

Ok-- Flynn was not popular with his fellow generals.
So there is a possibility he is a Russian agent.
Are you serious?

Self appointed no less.

Immediately after becoming director of Defense Intelligence Agency in 2012 and getting his 3rd star Flynn established contact with Sergie Kislyak the Russian ambassador who Flynn lied about when Flynn was national security adviser and also during the 2016 campaign and the hiatus between the election and inauguration lied about.

When Flynn was director of DIA he became the first US military officer admitted inside the GRU headquarters where he gave a speech on leadership and invited GRU chiefs to Washington and to the DIA while also trying to make a second trip to GRU that Pentagon denied authorization for and also cancelled the invitation to GRU chiefs. At the Pentagon the 4-star chief of Army security and intelligence began to wonder about Flynn's "capacity for linear thinking."

Flynn built his career as an exceptional officer of tactical intelligence -- intelligence based targeting in particular -- but Flynn got to Washington by putting his name, and rank, to a critical study of military intelligence written by two lieutenant colonels who simply had to bite the bullet about being listed as co-contributors.

At DIA Flynn's command staff revealed after his firing they'd have to spend an hour after each meeting trying to figure out what Flynn said. The officers said Flynn would say to go on a given matter then 5 minutes later it was a no-go and 5 minutes after that is was a maybe leaning each way. Flynn's chosen deputy was canned with Flynn besides in a single swoop bustup of a high military command rarely seen.



This is the assessment of Flynn's career and Flynn's association with Trump and the courts offered by John Schindler, a former Naval intelligence officer, a NSA former counter intelligence analyst and professor of Military Intelligence at the Naval War College:

The fall from grace of retired Lieutenant General Mike Flynn is one of the strangest sagas in the annals of America’s military and intelligence services. What makes Flynn’s implosion especially shocking is this represents his second major career blow-up in five years. His initial fall from grace came in August 2014, when President Barack Obama cashiered him as the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency after two difficult years in that job. Although Flynn, in his usual dissimulating fashion, portrayed his firing as a political act, the truth is Flynn was dumped from DIA for incompetence. That seldom happens in Washington, and it is nearly unheard-of at top levels of our Intelligence Community.

Mike Flynn was never the savvy intelligence intellectual he pretended to be, which explains why his directorship at DIA was such a disaster. While a competent tactical intelligence guy, Flynn had no idea how the big game was played inside the Beltway, so he dropped the ball when he was let on the field. This also explains how Flynn seemed to have no idea that his calls to the Russian embassy might be intercepted by the FBI, an astonishing ignorance for a career intelligence officer. Then again, there’s a lot that Mike Flynn ought to have known but somehow didn’t.

Michael Flynn’s Shady Past at DIA and Before Reveals He Was a Fraud | Observer

You guys want to stick up for a crackpot loon you are free to do that of course. You've been doing it all along for Trump so why not Flynn too.

 

[Athanasius68]

The only thing that we can agree is that your claim regarding what Sullivan SHOULD do contradicts that of even the Bush-appointed judge who says that no Appeals Court has ordered any judge to decide a pending motion in a particular way.

And this post of your has also the wrong format

We all agree that a judge cannot order a prosecutor to prosecute.
The prosecutor wishes to cease prosecution.
As such, there is only one option for Sullivan.