Will Flynn's plea be tossed Monday by federal Judge Sullivan, and he set free?

[Adre]

A guilty plea is a defendant admitting guilt, which is completely different than a Judge or a jury convicting a defendant of a crime.

That both instances RESULT in conviction does not negate the complete difference in how that result came about.

The difference is still in the details.

A jail cell doesn’t know the difference.

 

[Paul_Chance]

A guilty plea is a defendant admitting guilt, which is completely different than a Judge or a jury convicting a defendant of a crime.

That both instances RESULT in conviction does not negate the complete difference in how that result came about.

The difference is still in the details.

The difference doesn't matter.

In a trial scenario:

A. the prosecution alleges a violation of A
-the prosecution presents evidence of the violation in testimony and material
-the defense cross examines
-the jury or judge decide

In a guilty plea scenario

B. the prosecution alleges a violation of A
-the prosecution does not present evidence
-the defense presents one witness, the accused, who says "yes, the prosecution is correct, I did A.
-the judge accepts the plea

There is no difference, evidence in the form of the charge and the guilty plea is presented to the judge, the accused admits guilt, the result is a conviction. What differences there are are purely structural. "He lied." "Yes, I did." On to sentencing.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

Treason

yikes

Kelner asked Sullivan not to penalize Flynn for arguments his lawyers made in sentencing memos that appeared to suggest the FBI had tricked Flynn into lying. He said they only included those to differentiate Flynn from other defendants in the case who had received short prison sentences for lying.

But Sullivan fired back.

‘‘Neither of those individuals were a high-ranking official who committed a crime while in the West Wing and on the premises of the White House,’’ the judge said.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/na...-sentencing/4JmB1UbfDZHjOqwxbTkJ2H/story.html

 

[Busybody18]

why was he "interviewed" about something AFTER the election and was in his job description?


can ANYONE answer

 

[bigsly]

The difference doesn't matter.

Differents' existence validates they absolutely do matter.

You and I are different, even though our result is the same: human being.

Does that result invalidate our absolute differences?

 

[bigsly]

I believe Judge Sullivan will recuse himself from this case in the next 90 days for the clear prejudice he had to walk back today, basically because the prosecution insisted none of it was true at all.

 

[someoneyouknow]

why was he "interviewed" about something AFTER the election and was in his job description?


can ANYONE answer

Because by then he had committed the crime. Couldn't very well interview him about something which hadn't yet occurred, could we?

 

[LincolnDuncan]

I believe Judge Sullivan will recuse himself from this case in the next 90 days for the clear prejudice he had to walk back today, basically because the prosecution insisted none of it was true at all.

Not prejudice since his comments were made subsequent to review of the evidence.

Prejudice means to pre judge

 

[bigsly]

Not prejudice since his comments were made subsequent to review of the evidence.

Prejudice means to pre judge

That's the prejudice: his "evidence" was of only his own making.

“You were an unregistered agent of a foreign country while serving as the National Security Advisor to the president,” said Sullivan. After a 30-minute recess, Sullivan corrected his statement, saying that Flynn’s work for Turkey ended in November 2016.

“I felt terrible about that,” Sullivan said of his statement that Flynn was working for Turkey while in the White House.

At one point in the hearing, Sullivan asked van Grack if the special counsel ever considered charging Flynn with treason. Van Grack hesitated, according to reporters in the courtroom, but said that prosecutors never weighed those kinds of charges. Sullivan also walked back the treason question, saying that he did not intend to imply that Flynn was guilty of the crime.

No "evidence" exists of what Judge Sullivan clearly had no issue indicting Flynn about. That's prejudice, and that has absolutely no place on any bench if justice is truly to be served.

Also sadly for that justice, Justice Sullivan is probably the only one who can recuse himself, since the prosecutors obviously aren't going to ask him to recuse himself and I doubt Flynn wishes to stir the pot more while working with prosecutors for the next 3 months.

If Justice Sullivan is any more honorable than the defendant he unjustly vilified today, he certainly would recuse himself, for justice's sake.

Flynn is looking at a maximum of 6 months in federal prison and a fine of $9,500, with the prosecution still asking for no prison time served for Flynn. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of dollars he's liable for already just dealing with that insignificant sentence and fine. To fight it and then risk prosecutors coming after him big time for the ongoing Turkey situation, when they so far have given him a literal free pass about it, will only cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars more.

Flynn witnessed first-hand today how swift "justice" can turn on nothing but unsubstantiated prejudice from a judge. No prison time and $9,500 seems like a cheap deal to make with such "justice" just to be done with it.

 

[adrina]

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81ZZOi3zogL._SX425_.jpg

 

[Dribble]

The ignorance of the posters in this board still amazes me. They consider a guilty plea insignificant. Who gives a fuck what the sentence is? He admitted in a Court of Law to Federal crimes. Just one of the soon to be many for what history will prove to be the most corrupt Administration we have ever had

 

[bigsly]

He didn't admit "in a Court of Law to Federal crimes." He admitted to just one federal crime of lying to FBI investigators, which is certainly significant.

A sentence of no prison term and no fine (or even the max possible $9,500) is certainly insignificant to what has cost both taxpayers and the defense no doubt close to $1 million, at least.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

That's the prejudice: his "evidence" was of only his own making.



No "evidence" exists of what Judge Sullivan clearly had no issue indicting Flynn about. That's prejudice, and that has absolutely no place on any bench if justice is truly to be served.

Also sadly for that justice, Justice Sullivan is probably the only one who can recuse himself, since the prosecutors obviously aren't going to ask him to recuse himself and I doubt Flynn wishes to stir the pot more while working with prosecutors for the next 3 months.

If Justice Sullivan is any more honorable than the defendant he unjustly vilified today, he certainly would recuse himself, for justice's sake.

Flynn is looking at a maximum of 6 months in federal prison and a fine of $9,500, with the prosecution still asking for no prison time served for Flynn. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of dollars he's liable for already just dealing with that insignificant sentence and fine. To fight it and then risk prosecutors coming after him big time for the ongoing Turkey situation, when they so far have given him a literal free pass about it, will only cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars more.

Flynn witnessed first-hand today how swift "justice" can turn on nothing but unsubstantiated prejudice from a judge. No prison time and $9,500 seems like a cheap deal to make with such "justice" just to be done with it.

The judge has the authority to make a statement at the time of sentencing. He made that statement after reviewing the evidence presented in his court. You have no idea what the information is. But you should continue to flail away if it gives you relief.

 

[bigsly]

The judge has the authority to make a statement at the time of sentencing.

No doubt about that.

He made that statement after reviewing the evidence presented in his court.

There was no evidence presented in his court that actually justified his comments, that's why his comments were prejudiced.

You have no idea what the information is.

Judge Sullivan himself, after a short recess wherein prosecutors had to correct him that their information did not even suggest any of the prejudiced indictments Sullivan flung at Flynn, admitted he had no basis for his comments. Again, that's why they were prejudiced.

Do you wish to flail away more?

 

[Que]

Because by then he had committed the crime. Couldn't very well interview him about something which hadn't yet occurred, could we?

Committed which crime?

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Wrong. He walked back ONE statement, even though I don't see why he did. He said Flynn's lobbying work ended before he started in the Trump admin (keep in mind he was lying about it and not coming out and declaring himself an agent of a foreign gov't) as if that totally undermined his claim that Flynn was effectively acting as foreign agent while NSA of the US.

Fllynn published an op ed reversing his stance on the Turkish coup on the day Trump was inaugurated. The op ed which he wrote because he was getting paid hundreds of K to reverse his stance and now support the Turkish regime. And lying about it the entire time.

The prosecution did not say "none of it was true at all."

I believe Judge Sullivan will recuse himself from this case in the next 90 days for the clear prejudice he had to walk back today, basically because the prosecution insisted none of it was true at all.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

The judge has read a lot more than we are privy to (a) and as to what justifies his comments, that is a matter of opinion (b). And you're not the judge, he is.

You're lumping it all together instead of being specific about what he actually "walked back." Not his entire comments. He corrected himself on ONE factual error, but it had no great effect. You're completely overstating it.

He did not say all of his comments "had no basis." That's your b.s.

No doubt about that.

There was no evidence presented in his court that actually justified his comments, that's why his comments were prejudiced.

Judge Sullivan himself, after a short recess wherein prosecutors had to correct him that their information did not even suggest any of the prejudiced indictments Sullivan flung at Flynn, admitted he had no basis for his comments. Again, that's why they were prejudiced.

Do you wish to flail away more?

 

[bigsly]

Wrong. He walked back ONE statement, even though I don't see why he did. He said Flynn's lobbying work ended before he started in the Trump admin (keep in mind he was lying about it and not coming out and declaring himself an agent of a foreign gov't) as if that totally undermined his claim that Flynn was effectively acting as foreign agent while NSA of the US.

Don't forget the Judge also had to walk back any perception that he had accused Flynn of treason, which he infamously and "Arguably" did.

Fllynn published an op ed reversing his stance on the Turkish coup on the day Trump was inaugurated. The op ed which he wrote because he was getting paid hundreds of K to reverse his stance and now support the Turkish regime. And lying about it the entire time.

The crime(s) Flynn has been charged with per your indictments?

The prosecution did not say "none of it was true at all."

The prosecution most certainly did inform Judge Sullivan that his prejudiced statements toward Flynn were not true. That's why the Judge returned from recess and walked back his prejudiced statements. Or, do you actually fantasize a federal judge would publicly retract such statements if there were any truth to them?

 

[LincolnDuncan]

No doubt about that.



There was no evidence presented in his court that actually justified his comments, that's why his comments were prejudiced.



Judge Sullivan himself, after a short recess wherein prosecutors had to correct him that their information did not even suggest any of the prejudiced indictments Sullivan flung at Flynn, admitted he had no basis for his comments. Again, that's why they were prejudiced.

Do you wish to flail away more?

You have no idea what evidence was considered in that court.


Do you understand that he is the federal judge who is aware of all the evidence presented in his court and you're just a clown on the internet that doesn't know shit about shit?

 

[bigsly]

The judge has read a lot more than we are privy to (a) and as to what justifies his comments, that is a matter of opinion (b). And you're not the judge, he is.

You're lumping it all together instead of being specific about what he actually "walked back." Not his entire comments. He corrected himself on ONE factual error, but it had no great effect. You're completely overstating it.

He did not say all of his comments "had no basis." That's your b.s.

Of course, you're right. Flynn was an unregistered foreign agent committing treason while serving as President Trump's National Security Advisor, just as Judge Sullivan wailed about today. Strange thing about all that, though, is Flynn's prosecutors say it isn't true, they had to inform the Judge it isn't true, and that's why they didn't charge him with those hideous crimes but instead could only charge him with one single count of lying to federal investigators. Which was supposed to be what today's sentencing hearing was all about. At least Judge Sullivan admitted when he was wrong.

 

[bigsly]

You have no idea what evidence was considered in that court.


Do you understand that he is the federal judge who is aware of all the evidence presented in his court and you're just a clown on the internet that doesn't know shit about shit?

Your right, of course. Good thing Judge Sullivan didn't really retract his prejudiced view, that "evidence" convicting Flynn of being an unregistered foreign agent committing treason while serving in the White House.

Do you yet understand Mueller didn't charge Flynn according to your and the Judge's prejudiced view of their "evidence"? Maybe offer your prejudiced view why they didn't charge him with the hideous crimes you and the Judge indict him with, instead of the lone charge of lying to federal investigators about a phone call during which those same prosecutors say no crime at all was committed?

 

[adrina]

Obsession. Like a dog with a bone. Thing is, he's the only one that seems to be concerned about it. Oh and some dork on reddit. It's grasping at straws.

 

[bigsly]

Because by then he had committed the crime. Couldn't very well interview him about something which hadn't yet occurred, could we?

Committed which crime?

Excellent question.

On a day when sentencing for the lone crime he did cop to was supposed to finally occur, Flynn instead is accused both in court and here of additional crimes his prosecutors state their is no evidence to support, which is why they didn't charge him with any more serious of a crime than lying to federal investigators about a phone call, during which no crimes whatsoever were committed.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Please cite where "prosecutors said it wasn't true."

I dont see any evidence of what they said, certainly not that's "why" they only charged him with lying.

In fact we don't know ehat charges were left off the table in exchange for cooperation. Do you? They said in court today he'd be charged along with the other two were it not for the deak.

Care to explain when you became a fly on the wall of the SC office?

Of course, you're right. Flynn was an unregistered foreign agent committing treason while serving as President Trump's National Security Advisor, just as Judge Sullivan wailed about today. Strange thing about all that, though, is Flynn's prosecutors say it isn't true, they had to inform the Judge it isn't true, and that's why they didn't charge him with those hideous crimes but instead could only charge him with one single count of lying to federal investigators. Which was supposed to be what today's sentencing hearing was all about. At least Judge Sullivan admitted when he was wrong.

 

[bigsly]

In fact we don't know ehat charges were left off the table in exchange for cooperation. Do you?

But you claim to know those charges well enough to indict Flynn here?

They said in court today he'd be charged along with the other two were it not for the deak.

So, "They said in court today" that if not for the deal of Flynn pleading to one count of lying to federal investigators about a phone call during which no crimes were committed, which carries a maximum sentence of 6 months in jail and a $9,500 fine, they'd charge him with being an unregistered foreign agent committing treason in the White House?

If that's true as YOU say, and treason being a death sentence crime, then Mueller and his entire team should be fired, charged and prosecuted for criminal dereliction of duty.

One of the funnier instances in court today was reportedly when Judge Sullivan asked prosecutors if Flynn could be charged for allegedly being an unregistered foreign agent, as the Judge "Arguably" charged him with being. The prosecutor replied, "Uh, the Logan Act?" Incredulous because since being enacted in 1799, only two individuals have been indicted for violating it, one in 1802 and the other in 1852, neither of whom pled to violating it or were convicted of violating it.

So, again, you and the Judge are left with your prejudiced charges of treason. But at least the Judge, after consultation with prosecutors, sensibly backtracked his unsubstantiated treason accusation.