Judge Sullivan Scrambles For A Lifeline To Bail HIMSELF Out Of Dropped Flynn Case

[sakinago]

Cool story bro but you are straight out of your mind if you think ANYONE is buying your bs about Flynn simply not remembering anything about getting Russians to change their response to Obama's sanctions.

Only time sanctions EVER appears in that transcript, is when Flynn asked Kislyak "not to retaliate" on the sanctions.. Describe to me HOW the Obama Admin has a problem with "NOT get their diplomat corps kicked out of Russia????

You said this was all premediated. That was a leap of fantasy.. Flynn read in the WashPo the DAY BEFORE that the FBI had CLEARED him of anything Russia... That story was PLACED at the Washpo with "unnamed sources" as usual meaning that this was LEAKED out.. Whatchawanna bet that the leaking Comey placed it there to set the "tone" for the "sudden visit" the next day??

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-reviewed-flynns-calls-with-russian-ambassador-but-found-nothing-illicit/2017/01/23/aa83879a-e1ae-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html

By Ellen Nakashima and
Greg MillerJanuary 23, 2017
The FBI in late December reviewed intercepts of communications between the Russian ambassador to the United States and retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn — national security adviser to then-President-elect Trump — but has not found any evidence of wrongdoing or illicit ties to the Russian government, U.S. officials said

Although Flynn’s contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak were listened to, Flynn himself is not the active target of an investigation, U.S. officials said. The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday that U.S. counterintelligence agents had investigated the communications between Flynn and Kislyak.

Although Flynn has written critically about Russia, he also was paid to deliver a speech at a 2015 Moscow gala for RT, the Kremlin-sponsored international television station, at which he was seated next to Putin.

Now THATS how you set up an ambush... Amirite????

But wait there is more! He also pled guilty to lying about his work as an undeclared foreign agent for Turkey during the transition. Man, you really know how to pick your "victims".

Funny how all that other stuff GOT DROPPED in the guilty plea deal that Flynn originally agreed to isn't it?? The FARA violation never would have stuck in trial because FARA violations are usually resolved with CORRECTING the registrations. And Flynn's lawyers BOTCHED this process during the run up to the trial.. I might add MAYBE on purpose since they were screwing him every other way... And a PARTNER was involved in this who was NEVER even charged and had MORE to do with Turkey than HE did...

During the election, you had PODESTA group representing banks in Russia holding over 40% of ALL RUSSIAN ASSETS.. But no one seems to care.. Even tho that means that they representing the interests of 100s of dirty Russian Oligarchs including Putin himself... No big deal right? They had a FARA registration to DO that.... EVEN IF THE SENIOR PODESTA was running Hillary's campaign..

And guess who else was seated at the table with Putin besides Flynn at that RT Awards ceremony in Moscow??? None other than 2016 GREEN party candidate for Prez -- Jill Stein.. This ditzy woman than BRAGGED about Putin setting her up to TALK FOREIGN POLICY with high level diplomats the DAY AFTER the RT dinner.

Tell me -- WHY those 2 things dont even appear to bother you?????? Why does Jill Stein get to discuss HER Russia policy at the behest of PUTIN in Moscow -- and the media and the FBI and the INTEL agencies and the Obama Admin just took a nap on that....

You really have to DIG to find all that outrage about ONE COMMENT from Flynn asking Russia "not to retaliate".,.. Why would Obama be torqued about NO retaliation???"

Why did Flynn lie to FBI about his diplomatic wheeling and dealing during the transition?

Did someone make him do that?

Oh god, wherever you get your news it’s time to branch out. It was hardly a lie, a weak case for lying to the FBI as admitted by comey. The FBI lied to him, told him kysliack was the subject of the investigation months after his call. They had the transcripts and asked how the call went. Flynn even noted his recollection of it wasn’t great and gave vague broad strokes answers. Not because he was trying to deceive, just because he was trying to remember a call from months ago, when he makes 10 of those calls a day as intel secretary. This was a perjury trap. If that’s not a perjury trap than I don’t know what is.

On top of that Flynn’s supposed “lie” wasn’t material to any investigation, which is a requirement to prosecute. We know it wasn’t because they found no underlying crime, so what on earth could be material to nothing. It’s like dividing zero by zero. The agents investigating were filing a closing EC which is the last step in the whole process of closing a case. It involves paperwork and discussion with supervisors. This case was closed up until storzk called down and said don’t close it, coming from floor 27.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Cool story bro but you are straight out of your mind if you think ANYONE is buying your bs about Flynn simply not remembering anything about getting Russians to change their response to Obama's sanctions.

Only time sanctions EVER appears in that transcript, is when Flynn asked Kislyak "not to retaliate" on the sanctions.. Describe to me HOW the Obama Admin has a problem with "NOT get their diplomat corps kicked out of Russia????

You said this was all premediated. That was a leap of fantasy.. Flynn read in the WashPo the DAY BEFORE that the FBI had CLEARED him of anything Russia... That story was PLACED at the Washpo with "unnamed sources" as usual meaning that this was LEAKED out.. Whatchawanna bet that the leaking Comey placed it there to set the "tone" for the "sudden visit" the next day??

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-reviewed-flynns-calls-with-russian-ambassador-but-found-nothing-illicit/2017/01/23/aa83879a-e1ae-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html

By Ellen Nakashima and
Greg MillerJanuary 23, 2017
The FBI in late December reviewed intercepts of communications between the Russian ambassador to the United States and retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn — national security adviser to then-President-elect Trump — but has not found any evidence of wrongdoing or illicit ties to the Russian government, U.S. officials said

Although Flynn’s contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak were listened to, Flynn himself is not the active target of an investigation, U.S. officials said. The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday that U.S. counterintelligence agents had investigated the communications between Flynn and Kislyak.

Although Flynn has written critically about Russia, he also was paid to deliver a speech at a 2015 Moscow gala for RT, the Kremlin-sponsored international television station, at which he was seated next to Putin.

Now THATS how you set up an ambush... Amirite????

But wait there is more! He also pled guilty to lying about his work as an undeclared foreign agent for Turkey during the transition. Man, you really know how to pick your "victims".

Funny how all that other stuff GOT DROPPED in the guilty plea deal that Flynn originally agreed to isn't it?? The FARA violation never would have stuck in trial because FARA violations are usually resolved with CORRECTING the registrations. And Flynn's lawyers BOTCHED this process during the run up to the trial.. I might add MAYBE on purpose since they were screwing him every other way... And a PARTNER was involved in this who was NEVER even charged and had MORE to do with Turkey than HE did...

During the election, you had PODESTA group representing banks in Russia holding over 40% of ALL RUSSIAN ASSETS.. But no one seems to care.. Even tho that means that they representing the interests of 100s of dirty Russian Oligarchs including Putin himself... No big deal right? They had a FARA registration to DO that.... EVEN IF THE SENIOR PODESTA was running Hillary's campaign..

And guess who else was seated at the table with Putin besides Flynn at that RT Awards ceremony in Moscow??? None other than 2016 GREEN party candidate for Prez -- Jill Stein.. This ditzy woman than BRAGGED about Putin setting her up to TALK FOREIGN POLICY with high level diplomats the DAY AFTER the RT dinner.

Tell me -- WHY those 2 things dont even appear to bother you?????? Why does Jill Stein get to discuss HER Russia policy at the behest of PUTIN in Moscow -- and the media and the FBI and the INTEL agencies and the Obama Admin just took a nap on that....

You really have to DIG to find all that outrage about ONE COMMENT from Flynn asking Russia "not to retaliate".,.. Why would Obama be torqued about NO retaliation???"

Why did Flynn lie to FBI about his diplomatic wheeling and dealing during the transition?

Did someone make him do that?

He didn't.

He did the job Trump hired him to do.

The Obamunists told the lie, and you bought it like it was on sale.

Flynn is ON TAPE telling blatant lies about his ON TAPE conversations.

When Trump fired Flynn he said he fired him for lying to VP and FBI...and then there is you saying Flynn didn’t lie, how fucking insane can you get??

No vulgarity....pretend you're an adult.


Can you quote Flynn's 'lies'?

No?


Why not?

 

[charwin95]

American Thinker

Flynn Judge Ignores Supreme Court and the Constitution

By Daniel John Sobieski May 16, 2020

EXCERPT:

Which part of United States v. Michael Flynn does Judge Emmet Sullivan not understand? There is no third party in the case title -- only the names of the accuser and the accused. There is no understudy prosecutor to be employed when one party says he’s innocent and the other admits they have no case. Game over. The defendant is a free man unless you are in Judge Sullivan’s court where the signpost up ahead says “The Twilight Zone.”

On our planet, when there is no prosecutor to prosecute, there is no prosecution. Case is dismissed. Not on Judge Sullivan’s planet. For Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn it must have seen like a ruling from a parallel universe when, in an Alice-In-Wonderland meets Groundhog Day moment, for Judge Sullivan’s appointed former Judge John Gleeson to argue against AG Barr and defendant Flynn, and even invent a new charge of perjury for withdrawing his guilty plea entered under severe coercion and duress.

LINK

=============

The Supreme Court smashed this very behavior recently in a 9-0 vote

"SCOTUS is bound to crack down on this if it gets that far. Sullivan's abuse of amicus curiae (friend of the court) is both contrary to his own precedent, and in violation of a recent SCOTUS ruling. They actually ruled against this a few days ago in a 9-0 decision authored by RBG herself. The judiciary is simply not allowed to come up with new charges, new evidence, or new opinions on the fly. "

bolding mine

Sullivan should be forced off the bench!

Maybe we are missing something here? If judge Sullivan will just buckled and bent over for Barr’s corruption. Meaning he is part of the corruption by Trump and Barr. By standing up against these BULLIES he could get a Supreme Court nominee. Sullivan did the right thing. I’m very proud of him.
.

 

[Sunsettommy]

American Thinker

Flynn Judge Ignores Supreme Court and the Constitution

By Daniel John Sobieski May 16, 2020

EXCERPT:

Which part of United States v. Michael Flynn does Judge Emmet Sullivan not understand? There is no third party in the case title -- only the names of the accuser and the accused. There is no understudy prosecutor to be employed when one party says he’s innocent and the other admits they have no case. Game over. The defendant is a free man unless you are in Judge Sullivan’s court where the signpost up ahead says “The Twilight Zone.”

On our planet, when there is no prosecutor to prosecute, there is no prosecution. Case is dismissed. Not on Judge Sullivan’s planet. For Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn it must have seen like a ruling from a parallel universe when, in an Alice-In-Wonderland meets Groundhog Day moment, for Judge Sullivan’s appointed former Judge John Gleeson to argue against AG Barr and defendant Flynn, and even invent a new charge of perjury for withdrawing his guilty plea entered under severe coercion and duress.

LINK

=============

The Supreme Court smashed this very behavior recently in a 9-0 vote

"SCOTUS is bound to crack down on this if it gets that far. Sullivan's abuse of amicus curiae (friend of the court) is both contrary to his own precedent, and in violation of a recent SCOTUS ruling. They actually ruled against this a few days ago in a 9-0 decision authored by RBG herself. The judiciary is simply not allowed to come up with new charges, new evidence, or new opinions on the fly. "

bolding mine

Sullivan should be forced off the bench!

Maybe we are missing something here? If judge Sullivan will just buckled and bent over for Barr’s corruption. Meaning he is part of the corruption by Trump and Barr. By standing up against these BULLIES he could get a Supreme Court nominee. Sullivan did the right thing. I’m very proud of him.
.

Your desperate rationalization is stupid since the SCOTUS makes it clear in a recent ruling that what Sullivan is doing is completely INVALIID!

Here is that quote you ignored:

"SCOTUS is bound to crack down on this if it gets that far. Sullivan's abuse of amicus curiae (friend of the court) is both contrary to his own precedent, and in violation of a recent SCOTUS ruling. They actually ruled against this a few days ago in a 9-0 decision authored by RBG herself. The judiciary is simply not allowed to come up with new charges, new evidence, or new opinions on the fly. "

Sullivan is going to face a beatdown...., when his bullshit goes to the SCOTUS.

Stop being DUMB!

 

[PoliticalChic]

American Thinker

Flynn Judge Ignores Supreme Court and the Constitution

By Daniel John Sobieski May 16, 2020

EXCERPT:

Which part of United States v. Michael Flynn does Judge Emmet Sullivan not understand? There is no third party in the case title -- only the names of the accuser and the accused. There is no understudy prosecutor to be employed when one party says he’s innocent and the other admits they have no case. Game over. The defendant is a free man unless you are in Judge Sullivan’s court where the signpost up ahead says “The Twilight Zone.”

On our planet, when there is no prosecutor to prosecute, there is no prosecution. Case is dismissed. Not on Judge Sullivan’s planet. For Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn it must have seen like a ruling from a parallel universe when, in an Alice-In-Wonderland meets Groundhog Day moment, for Judge Sullivan’s appointed former Judge John Gleeson to argue against AG Barr and defendant Flynn, and even invent a new charge of perjury for withdrawing his guilty plea entered under severe coercion and duress.

LINK

=============

The Supreme Court smashed this very behavior recently in a 9-0 vote

"SCOTUS is bound to crack down on this if it gets that far. Sullivan's abuse of amicus curiae (friend of the court) is both contrary to his own precedent, and in violation of a recent SCOTUS ruling. They actually ruled against this a few days ago in a 9-0 decision authored by RBG herself. The judiciary is simply not allowed to come up with new charges, new evidence, or new opinions on the fly. "

bolding mine

Sullivan should be forced off the bench!

Maybe we are missing something here? If judge Sullivan will just buckled and bent over for Barr’s corruption. Meaning he is part of the corruption by Trump and Barr. By standing up against these BULLIES he could get a Supreme Court nominee. Sullivan did the right thing. I’m very proud of him.
.

And once again, one of the brainless Democrat serfs validates Rule #2

Rule #2
To know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

2a. If not for double standards Liberals would have no standards at all.


Let's review what has actually occurred.


"Presented with a litany of prosecutorial abuse, Judge Sullivan should welcome the dismissal. Normally a judge would demand to know how the prior prosecutors committed such egregious assaults on the rule of law.

Flynn was blackmailed into pleading guilty when the corrupt DoJ threatened to prosecute Flynn’s son. Unfortunately, these abusive tactics have come to be accepted as normal. Our nation cannot survive unless we reject these tyrannical and fascist methods. If the government can coerce innocent defendants and then pretend they voluntarily pled guilty, there is no due process.

Michael Flynn was interviewed by FBI agents on January 24, 2017, as the new National Security Advisor for the incoming Trump Administration. Falsely presenting themselves as colleagues discussing plans for standing up the new Administration, the FBI agents were in fact trying to trap Flynn in a perjury trap.

All the many details of the extreme corruption within the Obama Administration’s FBI and Department of Justice have been extensively presented elsewhere and would not fit here. But it is clear as Senator Chuck Grassley explained, including on Fox News, “And if he got to be national security adviser for President Trump, he’d know where the bodies are buried and he would make big changes.”

….Obama team’s coup d’etat against the incoming President Trump was in great danger. Flynn with his knowledge of the intelligence community would have exposed and stopped the phony Russia hoax and Deep State intrigues before it got rolling.

So James Comey and other coup plotters blamed Flynn for talking to the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on December 1 and December 22, 2016. That was literally Flynn’s job. The coup plotters pretend there might be something wrong with the incoming National Security Advisor talking to the Russian Ambassador.

Flynn was representing the transition team of the next President, which is an actual legal entity under the Presidential Transition Act of 1963. The Logan Act cannot apply because Flynn was representing the official, governmental transition team.



Flynn was misled by the prosecutors into making a guilty plea, without realizing that there was no legitimate reason for the FBI interview. Flynn had ineffective assistance of counsel from Covington & Burling.



But instead of Sullivan applying 18 U.S. Code § 401 to the bad behavior of the FBI and DoJ, "

Trump Must Pardon Flynn From Judge Sullivan’s New Charges

Judge Sullivan’s May 13, 2020, order is technically a new, different case as I understand it. President Trump can and must pardon Flynn specifically for any acts or omissions before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This can avoid any of the disadvantages of pardoning Flynn...

nationalfile.com

And those are the facts.

 

[berg80]

On top of that Flynn’s supposed “lie” wasn’t material to any investigation

So far you have all your facts wrong. Flynn was the incoming NSA, not the DNI. It wasn't months between the Kislyak conversation and the FBI interview. The FBI didn't lie to Flynn, Flynn confessed to lying to them.

Here's a response to one of the more glaring lies you told. Please dare to read it and challenge your beliefs. If you do you'll see just how wrong you are.

Why the Flynn Interview Was Predicated

The Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is flawed in many ways, but one of its weakest arguments is that the investigation of Flynn was not properly “predicated.”

www.lawfareblog.com

You should read this as well.

Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show

A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.

www.lawfareblog.com

 

[sakinago]

On top of that Flynn’s supposed “lie” wasn’t material to any investigation

So far you have all your facts wrong. Flynn was the incoming NSA, not the DNI. It wasn't months between the Kislyak conversation and the FBI interview. The FBI didn't lie to Flynn, Flynn confessed to lying to them.

Here's a response to one of the more glaring lies you told. Please dare to read it and challenge your beliefs. If you do you'll see just how wrong you are.

Why the Flynn Interview Was Predicated

The Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is flawed in many ways, but one of its weakest arguments is that the investigation of Flynn was not properly “predicated.”

www.lawfareblog.com

You should read this as well.

Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show

A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.

www.lawfareblog.com

Again with this lawfareblog. Second time I have to post this. Probably another thread but that just means this trash is that widespread.

Lawfareblog Forfeits Claim to Integrity -- No Other Explanation For Consistent Falsehoods In Story By Barbara McQuade

www.redstate.com

simple question. Was the FBI special agent assigned to Flynn going to close the case. Answer: yes. How do we know. Answer: he filed a closure EC, basically the last step in the closure process. Was this a rogue agent looking out for Flynn. Answer: No. How do we know that? Answer: because there is a very specific process that the FBI goes through to close a case, and the closure EC or whatever is the last step in that process. Other steps include discussing with ones supervisor on whether or not to close the case. You don’t just stand up from your desk and say “ah, case closed, time for dinner.”

 

[charwin95]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

No I don’t. I already told you. What part of your stupidity don’t you understand? You got nothing else to attack. Don’t tell me I’m winning. Thank you.

 

[Nostra]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

No I don’t. I already told you. What part of your stupidity don’t you understand? You got nothing else to attack. Don’t tell me I’m winning. Thank you.

Why would I tell you that you are winning? They don’t give out prizes for the lowest IQ on the board, Dummy.

 

[charwin95]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

With your low class disgusting uneducated attack. I doubt it if you even graduated high school. Get a life homie.

 

[charwin95]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

No I don’t. I already told you. What part of your stupidity don’t you understand? You got nothing else to attack. Don’t tell me I’m winning. Thank you.

Why would I tell you that you are winning? They don’t give out prizes for the lowest IQ on the board, Dummy.

IQ? You don’t have any IQ. All your post are just like a gang member running out of meth.
You have nothing else to attack except my English means you don’t have anything left. Dumbass. Means I’m winning.

 

[Nostra]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

With your low class disgusting uneducated attack. I doubt it if you even graduated high school. Get a life homie.

“With your low life disgusting uneducated attack.”

Maybe one day you will get lucky and form a complete sentence.

 

[Nostra]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

No I don’t. I already told you. What part of your stupidity don’t you understand? You got nothing else to attack. Don’t tell me I’m winning. Thank you.

Why would I tell you that you are winning? They don’t give out prizes for the lowest IQ on the board, Dummy.

IQ? You don’t have any IQ. All your post are just like a gang member running out of meth.
You have nothing else to attack except my English means you don’t have anything left. Dumbass. Means I’m winning.

English, do you speak it?

 

[charwin95]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

No I don’t. I already told you. What part of your stupidity don’t you understand? You got nothing else to attack. Don’t tell me I’m winning. Thank you.

Why would I tell you that you are winning? They don’t give out prizes for the lowest IQ on the board, Dummy.

Like I already said. You started this not me.

 

[charwin95]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

With your low class disgusting uneducated attack. I doubt it if you even graduated high school. Get a life homie.

“With your low life disgusting uneducated attack.”

Maybe one day you will get lucky and form a complete sentence.

Wrong again Homie. I didn’t started this you did. Attack my English eh! Thank you I’m winning.

 

[sakinago]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

With your low class disgusting uneducated attack. I doubt it if you even graduated high school. Get a life homie.

“With your low life disgusting uneducated attack.”

Maybe one day you will get lucky and form a complete sentence.

Wrong again Homie. I didn’t started this you did. Attack my English eh! Thank you I’m winning.

Slow down there with the winning Charlie sheen. We don’t want to hear any rants about tiger blood

 

[charwin95]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

No I don’t. I already told you. What part of your stupidity don’t you understand? You got nothing else to attack. Don’t tell me I’m winning. Thank you.

Why would I tell you that you are winning? They don’t give out prizes for the lowest IQ on the board, Dummy.

IQ? You don’t have any IQ. All your post are just like a gang member running out of meth.
You have nothing else to attack except my English means you don’t have anything left. Dumbass. Means I’m winning.

English, do you speak it?

LOL. I already said no repeatedly. No I don’t speak English. No hablo ingles. What part of your miserable life don’t understand? I’m tired of winning.

 

[charwin95]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

With your low class disgusting uneducated attack. I doubt it if you even graduated high school. Get a life homie.

“With your low life disgusting uneducated attack.”

Maybe one day you will get lucky and form a complete sentence.

Wrong again Homie. I didn’t started this you did. Attack my English eh! Thank you I’m winning.

Slow down there with the winning Charlie sheen. We don’t want to hear any rants about tiger blood

I’ll let you know when you are qualified to talk to me. For the mean time stay the hell out of my way. I’m talking to this lousy dude Nostra.

 

[Nostra]

The Last Refuge

Outrageous – Flynn Judge Orders Retired Judicial Ally to File Brief Supporting Prosecution of Michael Flynn…

Posted on May 13, 2020 by sundance

Excerpt:

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

LINK

=====

It appears to be another venal attempt to trash innocent people because they are disliked. The Judge is now acting like a rogue lawyer, trying to dredge up a series of bogus hurdles to a now dead case, the one the Lead Prosecutor dropped....., the one the DOJ dropped.

Flynn lied. Flynn admitted he lied. Flynn pled guilty to criminal charges. Why shouldn't the judge proceed with sentencing?

This is why the Democrat party is going down in flames, the determined drive to ignore and be ignorant of the Exculpatory evidence presented through legal documents, is why YOU are making a fool of yourself in your blind partisan drive.

I have posted several times the evidence that Obama officials CONSPIRED to entrap General Flynn, they even say so in their now released memos!

Democrats are trying hard to drag this out because they don't respect the rule of law.

It's not entrapment. It's how the FBI operates and their methods are backed by the Judicial branch.

​

While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).​

​

The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).​

​

Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).​

​

648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Another Googler not reading and thinking.. Entrapment in the general sense is misconduct where the law enforcers LEAD someone INTO an ACTUAL crime.. Like getting the Ruby Ridge Weaver guy to "saw off" a shot-gun for them or giving a potential suspected Jihadist a "fake bomb" to go try and explode...

Doesn't APPLY to "process crimes" when no ACTUAL crime has been committed or when NO WARRANT can be sought.. All of the futile googling you did is for "entrapment" where there IS a warrant to investigate this person existing...

This "process crime" was the ONLY way "get Flynn" open to them.. No GROUNDS for any further CRIMINAL investigation were left open.. That's what that "hand-written" memo that was lately uncovered TOLD YOU... The agents wanted to know "what their goal was here"?? "To get Flynn FIRED"? To get him to LIE" ??? NOTHING ABOUT PURSUING A LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION..

Was not LEGALLY "entrapment".. It was a Hail Mary desperation AMBUSH to PRODUCE a process crime where NO REAL CRIME was under investigation..

Carefully premeditated lying to Investigators is a “process crime”?? No silly, it’s just STRAIGHT UP CRIME.

Flynn was well aware that lying like this can land him in deep shit, and he did it anyway. Ever wonder why?

The only lies, we have learned, are from Obamunists. Flynn didn't lie......

“The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

​

Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show

President Obama was aware of the details of then-incoming national security adviser Michael Flynn's intercepted December 2016 phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, according to documents released Thursday as...

www.foxnews.com



“Strzok later would intervene and push to keep the Flynn probe open in January 2017, even after the FBI's Washington office signaled it wanted to close it because no "derogatory" information had been unearthed after consulting with other intelligence agencies in an exhaustive search….The stunning development came after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI as his legal fees mounted.



Both during and before the January 24, 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution for one count of lying to the FBI, the bureau acknowledged having those full transcripts, raising the question of why agents would need to ask Flynn about what he said during the calls with Kislyak, except potentially as a pretext to obtain a false statements charge.

The FBI possessed word-for-word transcripts of Flynn's December 2016 conversations with Kislyak, and publicly admitted to reviewing those transcripts and clearing Flynn of any wrongdoing.” Obama knew details of wiretapped Flynn phone calls, surprising top DOJ official in meeting with Biden, declassified docs show



So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.

From Fox News? LOL. Absolutely. Read post #417. That sums up Flynn actions all the way from Moscow to Turkey to Trump administration.
From Fox News Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak....... Of course Obama knew Flynn talked to Kislyak. Why wouldn’t he? Why is that a problem?

You should ask your self. With so many generals available as NSA. Why did he hired this reject general Flynn in the first place?

From Fox News? LOL.

Um, you just touted Judge Nap from Fox News you raving lunatic.

Well if a peasant low class uneducated American like you. Surely don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Pay attention ignorant Moron. Judge Napolitano from Fox blasted Barr’s corruption.

.

English, do you speak it?

No I don’t. I already told you. What part of your stupidity don’t you understand? You got nothing else to attack. Don’t tell me I’m winning. Thank you.

Why would I tell you that you are winning? They don’t give out prizes for the lowest IQ on the board, Dummy.

Like I already said. You started this not me.

Poor Buttercup.

 

[charwin95]

American Thinker

Flynn Judge Ignores Supreme Court and the Constitution

By Daniel John Sobieski May 16, 2020

EXCERPT:

Which part of United States v. Michael Flynn does Judge Emmet Sullivan not understand? There is no third party in the case title -- only the names of the accuser and the accused. There is no understudy prosecutor to be employed when one party says he’s innocent and the other admits they have no case. Game over. The defendant is a free man unless you are in Judge Sullivan’s court where the signpost up ahead says “The Twilight Zone.”

On our planet, when there is no prosecutor to prosecute, there is no prosecution. Case is dismissed. Not on Judge Sullivan’s planet. For Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn it must have seen like a ruling from a parallel universe when, in an Alice-In-Wonderland meets Groundhog Day moment, for Judge Sullivan’s appointed former Judge John Gleeson to argue against AG Barr and defendant Flynn, and even invent a new charge of perjury for withdrawing his guilty plea entered under severe coercion and duress.

LINK

=============

The Supreme Court smashed this very behavior recently in a 9-0 vote

"SCOTUS is bound to crack down on this if it gets that far. Sullivan's abuse of amicus curiae (friend of the court) is both contrary to his own precedent, and in violation of a recent SCOTUS ruling. They actually ruled against this a few days ago in a 9-0 decision authored by RBG herself. The judiciary is simply not allowed to come up with new charges, new evidence, or new opinions on the fly. "

bolding mine

Sullivan should be forced off the bench!

Maybe we are missing something here? If judge Sullivan will just buckled and bent over for Barr’s corruption. Meaning he is part of the corruption by Trump and Barr. By standing up against these BULLIES he could get a Supreme Court nominee. Sullivan did the right thing. I’m very proud of him.
.

Your desperate rationalization is stupid since the SCOTUS makes it clear in a recent ruling that what Sullivan is doing is completely INVALIID!

Here is that quote you ignored:

"SCOTUS is bound to crack down on this if it gets that far. Sullivan's abuse of amicus curiae (friend of the court) is both contrary to his own precedent, and in violation of a recent SCOTUS ruling. They actually ruled against this a few days ago in a 9-0 decision authored by RBG herself. The judiciary is simply not allowed to come up with new charges, new evidence, or new opinions on the fly. "

Sullivan is going to face a beatdown...., when his bullshit goes to the SCOTUS.

Stop being DUMB!

Being stay on his ground and not getting bullied against tyranny and corruption is an honorable thing to do. SCOTUS I have not heard anything about SCOTUS.

This topic has been repeated many time over and over. If I go with your decision to support Barr and Trump and you.... Then I’ll be part of the corruption.
I’m being nice. I didn’t call you DUMB.