DOJ Appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel - Jerome Corsi Rejects Plea Deal

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[billsfan1959]

17 minutes ago, daz28 said:

When asked how we could be sure it wouldn't be a clown show, he said, and I quote, "I'll oversee it".  

 

Who in the **** cares what he said. Tell me what he did. Or do you actually believe Trump personally oversaw every loan granted under the bills - even though there were specific guidelines as to how the loans would be administered and who would be responsible for monitoring the process?

 

This is beyond idiotic.

[daz28]

15 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Who in the **** cares what he said. Tell me what he did. Or do you actually believe Trump personally oversaw every loan granted under the bills - even though there were specific guidelines as to how the loans would be administered and who would be responsible for monitoring the process?

 

This is beyond idiotic.

I told you what he did.  He took responsibility.  He shouldn't have, but when he screws up that's your guys out.  Musta been someone else's fault.  He fired the oversight on the spot with no reason.  That was idiotic

 

Speaking of idiotic, do you think interns in Washington can write a bill in a few days that will cover what the 10k top corporate lawyers in the world can't dissect in a few days?  Are you sure the guidelines were specific enough?  Are you sure about how long it takes to cook those grits...My cousin Vinny

Edited May 13, 2020 by daz28

[billsfan1959]

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

I told you what he did.  He took responsibility.  He shouldn't have, but when he screws up that's your guys out.  Musta been someone else's fault.  He fired the oversight on the spot with no reason.  That was idiotic

 

Speaking of idiotic, do you think interns in Washington can write a bill that will cover what the 10k top corporate lawyers in the world can't dissect in a few days?  Are you sure the guidelines were specific enough?

 

He didn't do that. Regardless of what he said, he did not step in, take over the process, and administer the loans. Can you understand the distinction between words and actions? 

 

As far as writing the bills, he didn't do that either. If you have a problem with that, why don't you take it up with your wonderful Speaker of the House, who held up the process, on two separate bills, and then stood up on national television telling everyone that she and her fellow democrats made sure the bills would have appropriate oversight?

[Deranged Rhino]

The new move by Sullivan is an attempt to force a pardon. It won’t happen. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1260705216829239296

[Dr. Who]

1 hour ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

He didn't do that. Regardless of what he said, he did not step in, take over the process, and administer the loans. Can you understand the distinction between words and actions? 

 

As far as writing the bills, he didn't do that either. If you have a problem with that, why don't you take it up with your wonderful Speaker of the House, who held up the process, on two separate bills, and then stood up on national television telling everyone that she and her fellow democrats made sure the bills would have appropriate oversight?

Ice cream

[Deranged Rhino]

13 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

The new move by Sullivan is an attempt to force a pardon. It won’t happen. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1260705216829239296

 

 

Gleeson is a Clinton appointee and retired. 

 

It's all for show. 

 

And it won't work. They're trying to bait Trump into a pardon, which would lock in the miscarriage of justice. 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[njbuff]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Trump was right all along and the delusional left still kisses Obama's azz.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[Hedge]

6 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Gleeson is a Clinton appointee and retired. 

 

It's all for show. 

 

And it won't work. They're trying to bait Trump into a pardon, which would lock in the miscarriage of justice. 

 

 

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by Hedge

[daz28]

8 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

He didn't do that. Regardless of what he said, he did not step in, take over the process, and administer the loans. Can you understand the distinction between words and actions? 

 

As far as writing the bills, he didn't do that either. If you have a problem with that, why don't you take it up with your wonderful Speaker of the House, who held up the process, on two separate bills, and then stood up on national television telling everyone that she and her fellow democrats made sure the bills would have appropriate oversight?

Are you literally the walking unconscious?  If he says he's taking the role, then he's the boss.  He did but didn't mean it???  That's derangement syndrome in a nutshell.  

[billsfan1959]

3 hours ago, daz28 said:

Are you literally the walking unconscious?  If he says he's taking the role, then he's the boss.  He did but didn't mean it???  That's derangement syndrome in a nutshell.  

 

In reading through your posts, I have concluded there are two issues that prevent you from reaching any kind of reasonable, intelligent conclusion:.

 

First Issue: This is exactly the problem with people like you. You absolutely cannot distinguish between the things Trump says and the things he does. For some reason, you get so spun up over his outrageous statements or bombastic personality that you are literally unable to objectively look at his actual actions. He did NOT personally take over any programs outlined in the bills, nor did he change the oversight determined by congress in the bills. If you can provide specific evidence  that he did either one of those things, please share. If you can't provide any specific evidence, then maybe you should just STFU about it.

 

Second Issue: You're an idiot

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

13 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

The new move by Sullivan is an attempt to force a pardon. It won’t happen. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1260705216829239296

 

 

Judge Sullivan Disregards Two Controlling Precedents By Appointing Amicus In Flynn Case

Mark ChenowethContributor-FORBES

 

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan disregarded two controlling precedents from higher courts with his decision to appoint John Gleeson as amicus curiae in the U.S. v. Michael Flynn case this week. Judicial conduct similar to J. Sullivan’s in these prior, far less politically charged cases was roundly and unanimously condemned by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, D.C. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan, and their colleagues across the ideological spectrum. So, whether or not one agrees with the Department of Justice’s call to drop its charges against President Trump’s former National Security Advisor, Gen. Michael Flynn, there should be widespread agreement that J. Sullivan has veered way out of line.

One week ago, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 9-0 decision, authored by Justice Ginsburg, that took judges to task for similar amicus antics. Her opinion for the Court in U.S. v. Sineneng-Smith upbraided the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for violating a basic aspect of legal proceedings called the “party presentation principle.” In a nutshell, this concept dictates that judges must decide the case as presented by the parties before them. They are not to go out questing for dragons to slay (or issues to tackle) that the parties have not brought before them. As J. Ginsburg put it: “[C]ourts are essentially passive instruments of government … They ‘do not, or should not, sally forth each day looking for wrongs to right. [They] wait for cases to come to [them], and when [cases arise, courts] normally decide only questions presented by the parties.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markchenoweth/2020/05/14/judge-sullivan-disregards-two-controlling-precedents-by-appointing-amicus-in-flynn-case/#257502de6f0a

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

13 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Gleeson is a Clinton appointee and retired. 

 

It's all for show. 

 

And it won't work. They're trying to bait Trump into a pardon, which would lock in the miscarriage of justice. 

If you're Sullivan, or Comey, McCabe, Strozk Brennan or Joe "I didn't know nothing oh yes I actually knew everything" Biden, seems that Gleeson is a really good friend to have in your pocket. 

[Wacka]

Tibs demonstrates that terminal TDS is worse than terminal syphilis.

[Buffalo_Gal]

I don't exactly understand that, but I have seen it mentioned... get it reassigned and off Sullivan's desk. Some have speculated he wants exactly that. Some have speculated Sullivan is the resistance's last gasp (tied up for the next few months). I have no idea what to think in light of the last three years.

 

 

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

30 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I don't exactly understand that, but I have seen it mentioned... get it reassigned and off Sullivan's desk. Some have speculated he wants exactly that. Some have speculated Sullivan is the resistance's last gasp (tied up for the next few months). I have no idea what to think in light of the last three years.

 

 

 

 

By Charlotte Butash, Hilary Hurd

Friday, May 8, 2020, 4:05 PM

 

"Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a), the government may dismiss an indictment, information or complaint “with leave of the court.” And this has a lot of people wondering today whether Judge Emmet G. Sullivan might refuse to grant consent to let the case go."

"Sullivan has been dealing with Flynn’s machinations in his courtroom for more than two years. Some commentators understandably regard the Justice Department’s current conduct as an unacceptable bait and switch, but precedent from the Supreme Court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit leaves little room for the judge presiding over the Flynn case to decline to grant the government’s motion."

[Tiberius]

So nice to see people standing up for the rule of law against this corrupt regime https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/14/judge-sullivan-shows-awesome-power-federal-judges/

 

 

Quote

 

First, Sullivan is signaling to the Justice Department (especially to career lawyers) that he is not going to let it off the hook when it does President Trump’s bidding. Sullivan will act independently in evaluating the attorney general’s move, perhaps even calling witnesses to testify as to Barr’s motives.

Second, Barr’s attempt to dismiss the case is not a slam dunk. Far from it. Former prosecutor Renato Mariotti observes, “Sullivan’s decision here means that he’s seriously considering denying DOJ’s motion and he wants to consider whether that decision is wise and what the implications of that decision are. . . . Today’s order by Judge Sullivan is very bad news for the DOJ. Their motion was highly unusual, and they will have to be prepared to answer many difficult questions about the odd positions that they’ve taken.”

Third, Gleeson is a wise pick, which means trouble for the Justice Department lawyers. Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe — who said, “Retired U.S. District Court Judge John Gleeson is a strong choice for the task assigned to him by Judge [Emmet] Sullivan” — and multiple former prosecutors with whom I spoke attest to Gleeson’s skills as a prosecutor and his integrity. His interest here is in preventing the sort of perversion of the courts that Barr cavalierly undertakes in service to Trump, whom Barr wrongly believes is his client. (The American people are his client.)

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

57 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

So nice to see people standing up for the rule of law against this corrupt regime https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/14/judge-sullivan-shows-awesome-power-federal-judges/

 

 

 

Time to dig up any and all dirt on a very partisan hack.  He's already opined, seems far from impartial and needs to be treated as such. Obv political play by Sullivan taking care of his Irish pal Gleeson.