Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:


It’s the same defense mechanism that resulted in “everyone who disagrees with me must be a Russian not”. 


Or you calling anyone stupid because they don’t buy all the BS your obsessed with selling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BillStime said:


sorry I don’t play by your rules

 

You don’t answer questions posed directly to you? That’s not a “rule” that’s common courtesy.  

 

1 minute ago, Warren Zevon said:

Everyone who disagrees with me is a garlic knot 

 

Hey, wow, look who showed up.  Deppity Fife!

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BillStime said:


Here’s your answer - @Deranged Rhino has already admitted to having more than one login. 
 

Sorry you can’t keep up with a MESSAGE board.

 

Why are you answering for Warren Zevon?

I can keep up, that why I’m asking you (*not* WZ ?).

 

 

 

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Yes, my original one from when I joined in 2003. The last post from that login was in early 2014... but sure, it's the same thing :lol: 

 

Well, thank you for answering.

I’m still trying to get an answer from BillStime to my original two questions...

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

You don’t answer questions posed directly to you?    That’s not a “rule” that’s common courtesy.  

 

 

It is what a mature adult would do.

 

Unless you have already stated that you will not answer a question from a particular (unentitled) poster, as i have with Tiberius.

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 6
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

What about the wrongly accused who’ve been convicted? You know, inmates freed after their verdicts are overturned. It happens frequently.  Are those people only temporarily guilty?

 

 

It is extremely rare for a verdict to be set aside.  It’s more frequent for a judgment to be reversed on appeal, but that too is fairly rare. Until the verdict is set aside or judgment reversed, those people are considered guilty.   When the judgment is reversed the finding of guilt is expunged.  At this point, that makes Flynn ...  you guessed it ... guilty! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

You're doing it again, and I've acknowledged your value twice while you've implied I'm being obtuse.  

 

Though...what unresolved motion does Flynn have pending?  And btw---on Friday you were pretty clear you were guessing on the conviction as you had not really paid much attention to the case.  Today though...you wrote this:

 

#conflicted #feelingwary #wordsmatter 

 

Oh...and in the past, you've been quite vocal about name-calling and lost arguments.  Et tu, Section3eh?

I don’t lose anything.   Today i saw a piece in the news, and it turns out that Flynn pleaded guilty.  There has been no change in position. 
 

The motion apparently is to vacate the plea.  At this point, the question of Flynn’s guilt (he was convicted upon his plea of guilty) is settled.  Flynn wants to reopen that question, but to do so he has to demonstrate a reason why he should be permitted by the court to withdraw the plea.  It can’t be simply that he changed his mind.  It could be a change in govt position on sentence recommendation (aka the bait and switch).  It could be that his plea was infected by ineffective assistance of counsel.  Or it could be that the plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.  Here it appears that he’s pursuing the first two grounds.  Maybe the court allows him to withdraw the plea, maybe it doesn’t.  But it can’t be as simple as him changing his mind and declaring that he decided he no longer wants to be guilty.   Otherwise we’d never have finality in any criminal case. 

46 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

JONATHAN TURLEY: In Michael Flynn case, Judge Sullivan’s deplorable overreach turns justice into mob rule.

 

 

Note to Judge Sullivan: When Matt Taibbi says your ruling could have come from a judge in Belarus, are you really upholding the rule of law?

 
 
 
 
 

Here, yup.  He is.  I’d love to hear from you how he’s not.  Please share your expertise. 

Edited by SectionC3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Here, yup.  He is.  I’d love to hear from you how he’s not.  Please share your expertise. 

 

 

As you should have discerned,

 

The expertise is shown by the experienced lawyer in the posted article.

 

The one you likely ignored.

 

Your constant asking for others opinions, which you obviously do not really want, says a lot about how you post.

 

I have been a Registered nurse for over 40 years, I have offered my own opinion when I choose to.

 

 

 

 

Edited by B-Man
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...