18 Burst results for "Judge Sullivan"

"judge sullivan" Discussed on KCRW

KCRW

06:54 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on KCRW

"Left, Right and center. You're listening to all the president's lawyers. The podcast about all of President Trump's legal issues, and Ken White is with me. Ken is my co host, a criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor. He writes The Pope Hat Report newsletter on sub Stacked Hello can Hello, Josh. That was a real show on Tuesday. I don't even know hair supposed preside over something like that, where one of the parties just wants to fight with you. Well, yeah, we're fight with everybody I meet is tryingto moderate. Ah, drunks fighting in a bar. But, you know, at least we have cheerful legal news to fall back on. Right. Well, that's what I mean. I'm talking about the Tuesday hearing about Michael Flynn and Weather Judge Emmet Sullivan will proceed to sentence him with Flynn's attorney, Sidney Powell. Basically spending the whole hearing talking about how Emmet Sullivan is so biased in this proceeding is so unfair and such, I feel you need to be more specific about which Show your asking me, But, yes. Ah, the hearing in front of Judge Sullivan and Michael Flynn's case, Ah was surprising and appalling. Judge Sullivan. Came out loaded for bear with a very lengthy recitation of the history of the case and the relevant facts as he saw it. Ah, and things just and went south from there. Yeah, just to give to give listeners a little bit of a background. I mean, if if you listen to this show every week, you've certainly been following this with us, but we could forgive those of you who may not have been following it. Michael Flynn, the president's former national security adviser, pleaded guilty to making false statements to federal investigators when he mischaracterized a conversation he had during the presidential transition with Russian ambassador to United States. Sergei Kislyak on this case has been kicking around for a long time. Flynn was in theory cooperating with the Mueller investigation. Into the links between the Trump campaign and Russia on DH. After pleading guilty, Flynn sought to withdraw his plea and said that the whole thing had been a witch hunt against him and ultimately got the trump Department of Justice on his side. Moving to withdraw the charges against Flynn, even though Flynn had already pleaded guilty to the charge that he had made false statements to federal investigators. And so this, it's this very odd situation where the government wants a case dismissed. The defendant also wants case dismissed, and the judge has been hesitating about whether to do that. You had action in the appellate courts. With Flynn and the government, basically saying the judge doesn't have discretion here. He has to dismiss this case because the government asked for that. The judge is not the prosecutor on he's and Sullivan has been allowed to proceed, at least to this hearing. That happened this week where he heard arguments from the government and from Flynn's attorney that he ought to dismiss the case and also arguments from retired Judge John Gleason. Whom Judge Emmet Sullivan appointed to make the argument that he should not dismiss the case because none of the parties in the case actually wanted not to be dismissed. So this hearing was was Gleason's argument convincing. Ah do do you look at this hearing that happened and and all the Stearman drawing around it and see odds that Judge Emmet Sullivan might go ahead and actually sentenced Michael Flynn for this thing that he pleaded guilty to Well, I think those are two completely different questions. Whether Gleason was convincing or the government was and what Judge Sullivan will dio the answer is at least it was absolutely convincing Gleason Very bluntly put forth all the ways that the government's arguments were ridiculous, contradicted things the government had said before. Indeed, things that were said in motions that hadn't yet been ruled on. Ah and really helped Judge Sullivan forced the government to the clown itself. TTO make arguments that would make Sean Hannity blush about the nature of the case to engage in, you know, while conspiracy theorizing about the people involved and to make really terrible legal arguments, arguments that ah Criminal defense attorney wouldn't make about a case because they would be so not credible. All that said all those problems with the government's theories about why there was a problem with the case against Flynn. It wasn't cleared all that Sullivan thought he could, or should. Push forward with the prosecution deny the motion to dismiss. He asked questions that repointing and and really went to the practicalities of any further prosecution. You know? How could he get the government to move forward when it didn't want, Teo? Is this sentencing? Or is it Ah, allowing him to withdraw the plea and then a prosecution the case And how does that work? So I didn't wind up being moved from my initial take. Which was that Sullivan was going to use this as ah, opportunity to expose just really the incredible nature the corruption of the government's take, but ultimately that he was backed into a corner about what he could practically D'oh. I could be wrong and we'll see when it's all of it comes up with an order after some further briefing, But it really demonstrated that it's not clear how he's supposed to proceed if the government isn't interested in prosecuting Flynn. Judge Gleeson, in arguing against the dismissal made some of the same arguments that you've made on this show about the government's claims that it had two week a case here to prosecute that basically the sorts of issues, the government says there were with this case about the credibility of witnesses and about the high bar that supposedly exist to prove. That someone made a material false statement in the process of a criminal investigation that the government routinely takes. The opposite sides of those arguments has in the past will do so in the future on Gleason said that you know, a first year prosecutor one day out of law school could win a conviction. In the Michael Flynn case, which you and you've said previously on this show that maybe that's not how the law should be. Maybe it should be harder to win a case like this, but that the government is being ridiculous when it says that it simply couldn't win this case. Absolutely, And I mean, I think they're credible arguments that their problems with The techniques, the people the FBI used here in going after flight. I think there could be a good faith arguments for them. Not doing that. The problem is that the government's position here is not sincere. It doesn't reflect a change in policy. It doesn't reflect actual disquiet with those type of techniques is just using those arguments in this one case because it's a friend of the president only to a band them immediately and argue against them forevermore and that's what's going on here. The argument about how difficult it would be put them to put on a case relies on this idea that they couldn't prove what Flynn said during the meeting that you know there were problems of the credibility of these FBI agents, based mostly on You know, Fox news conspiracy theories about them, and they couldn't prove that what Flynn set. Ah, and you know, that's pretty ridiculous..

Michael Flynn government Judge Emmet Sullivan Judge John Gleason Judge Sullivan attorney president Sullivan Judge Gleeson Ah prosecutor Trump Ken White Josh FBI Russia Sean Hannity Sergei Kislyak United States
Appeals court keeps Flynn case alive

Bloomberg Law

05:37 min | 1 year ago

Appeals court keeps Flynn case alive

"Legal saga of Michael Flynn is not over yet. The full DC Federal Court of Appeals has ruled that the Justice Department and the former Trump National Security Advisor cannot force the trial judge to dismiss the criminal case against Flynn without a hearing. The 82 decision was the result of a rare on bank hearing after a three judge panel ruled in favor of Flynn in June. The case has taken unusual twists and turns with the latest separation of powers fight between a veteran federal judge and the Trump Administration. Perhaps the most unusual Joining me is former federal prosecutor Robert Mintz, a partner McCarter in English. But what was the reason the full court gave for reversing the decision of the three judge panel? Well, the opinion by the full court of people really was a procedural decision. It really turned on the question of whether or not the Court of Appeals should be granting this rarely granted writ of mandate in a kind of riddle, man. Dana is something that is Only infrequently used. It was really not a surprise that the full Court of Appeals ruled the way it did. Because in this case, judge Children have not actually done anything that he had not even had a hearing that he'd not ruled against. The Department of Justice is motion to dismiss. And so in this case, it was difficult. We're really impossible for Flint lawyers to argue that they were some manifest. Injustice. If this writ of mandamus was not granted, and that they had no adequate alternative beings in order to satisfy their claim or gain the release they were seeking here, the relief could simply come on appeal. It goes back to jail salivating dogs. Sullivan could make a decision on what the Court of appeal says. If you don't like the decisions I made, you could be right back before the court of Appeals again and we will reconsider the case at that point. The D. C court confirmed what many legal experts have been saying that this was an unprecedented move by Flynn saying that Flynn has not sighted any case in which our court or any court issued the writ to compel a district court to decide an undecided motion in a particular way. Does that put into context how odd this motion was at this time? Yes, This whole case has been extremely unusual for a whole variety of reasons than what it really turned on this question of who has the right to determine whether the case should be dismissed. Thankfully, the executive branch clearly has the authority to commence or to continue prosecution that something that is up to the Department of Justice. That rule 48 a required believe of court before a case is a mess, And I think that's what this entire controversies about. What does leave of Courtney did give the trial judge the authority to probe the Department of Justice for the reasons that they are dismissing a case or does the trial just stuff we have to accept the dismissal at face value? And dismiss the case. Regardless of any concerns that the trial judge may have about the motivation behind the Department of Justice is decision. What were the dissents by two Republican appointees based on Essentially that it is the Department of Justice is Lone authority to decide whether to prosecute a case. But what this hearing is really about the question of whether or not the trial judge gets to probe into the reasoning behind the Department of Justice is decision to drop this case what the dissenting judges are arguing that the trial judge does not have the authority. To probe into the internal decision making by the Department of Justice that that's an executive Department decision and that what the court here is doing is usurping the authority of the executive department to decide whether or not to prosecute criminal cases. This is obviously a victory for Judge Emmet Sullivan. But how much of a victory and what I mean by that is Did the D C circuit court define what kind of hearing he can hold. Can he actually dig into the administration's motives for dismissing the case against Flynn? The Court of Appeals sent a very clear signal to the trial judge that they do not expect the hearing to turn into any kind of a circus. And in fact, the lawyer who is representing Judge Sullivan before the full Court of appeals, actually represented during the argument that there will be no discovery from the Department of Justice during any kind of sharing will be no evidentiary hearing, And in fact, she argued that the judge may well decide to dismiss this case after the party simply found grief. Is this one of the longest guilty please you've ever seen. Michael Flynn pleaded guilty in December off 2017. This case does have a rather convoluted history. It began with a guilty plea in 2017, where he had been lying to FBI agent about his conversations with Russia's faster to the United States. In the weeks leading up to President Trump's inauguration. Then he hired a new lawyer, and in 2019, he began to retreat from his prior position, trying to undo his guilty plea. Initially, a Department of Justice opposed efforts to withdraw the guilty plea and then in an about face took the position that the case should be dismissed. That's what bled us to where we are today, but this has been a protracted battle where we've seen the defendant admit twice in court. For lying to federal agents amended now attracting his plea and wants the case to be dismissed. Interestingly, the Department of Justice is logic for dismissing the case is not the General Clinton did not lie to federal agents, but is that it wasn't

Department Of Justice Court Of Appeals Michael Flynn Dc Federal Court Of Appeals Justice Department Emmet Sullivan D C Circuit Court Trump Administration Executive President Trump Robert Mintz Mccarter Flint Advisor English Dana Partner FBI
"judge sullivan" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

77WABC Radio

06:06 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

"We use foreign language. When we say they all do this together. Who knows why, but in any event decided that they were not going to permit Michael Flynn to go free, as is the direction or intention of the Department of Justice based on the fact that his prosecution, his persecution, his ordeal. Was not built on fact it was built on prejudice. However, Judge Sullivan Judge Emmet Sullivan is now once again in charge of the final stages of Michael Flynn's or deal or not. And the writing most recently in the National Review Online, You lay out a chronology of events that points to the fact that Michael Flynn very well will remain. A new resolved until it leased the election. If not into the new year. Did I read you correctly? You did, John. I think we had some hope after the court of Appeals, the D C circuit. Issued its opinion that this could be resolved quickly because they encourage Judge Sullivan Act with dispatch. They didn't order him to do that, but they certainly indicated that that was what they desire to see. And I think Judge Sullivan unfortunately, has turned a deaf ear to that part of their opinion. So what I was reacting to and what I wrote, was what's known as a minute order, which is a brief order that he puts on the docket sheet that gets that gets published and that he put out the day after the court of Appeals. Issued its opinion and, regrettably, what he's talking about now is having the parties to the case file a status report three weeks from now. To propose a schedule going forward of submissions of briefs and then someday we'll have a little argument. And when you play this allowed, it certainly looks like he's looking to stretch this out. Beyond Election Day. I did not enjoy law school, and I certainly do not know what a courtroom looks like in action. But Andy doesn't this courtroom need a prosecutor? If Judge Sullivan is to continue this case Can you? Can you hold a man back, Uh, who The whole world knows, is not to be pursued by the Department of Justice. Well. You know, John, if you were having it if the Endeavour that was underway was tohave a criminal trial. Or something of that sort. You would obviously need a prosecutor. But when what you're talking about is you need a judge to take some kind of action in order to close out the case. You're really at the mercy of the judge because there wasn't anything in there some law on the books that directs district judges to move a case. From arrest to indictment and from indictment to trial. But once someone has pled guilty On DH. What? You're talking about his emotion to dismiss the case. There's not any law in the books that tells the judge, You must do that by X Day so they're at the mercy In many ways of Judge Sullivan and as I said the Court of Appeals prodded him a bit in their opinion, saying that they expected that he would act with dispatch, but they didn't order him. To do that, And I think you know he's goingto tryto string things along, but that who speaks for the people here? Does the judge speak for the people does? Is he the judge and the prosecutor? Can he developed new facts? Are the facts fixed in this justice says, Uh, he walks And can Sullivan introduced another Version of that Trump's over the Justice Department. Well. That was a big issue in the in the argument over the mandate Ms petition, which was when the Flynn team was trying to get the Court of appeals to order Solvent to drop the case. And what Judge Sullivan's lawyer represented to the court of Appeals was that there was no prospect of having new evidence brought in no prospect of having you know this was floated at the beginning. This idea of bringing Justice Department lawyers and officials in to try to, you know, get them to testify about what the Justice Department's deliberations were, and decided to dismiss the case. They knew that that would be controversial and cross some serious constitutional lines, so I think they rain that routine in and decided To say no, We're not gonna have a hearing. We're not going to do anything like that. But that doesn't prevent. The last of the hearing doesn't prevent Judge Sullivan from slow walking. A matter on his hearing calendar, and I think he's trying to do that because he doesn't want to dismiss the case. I think he knows that he can't stop President Trump from pardoning Flynn if it comes to that, but if I did more to win the election Trump would really have to pardon Flynn because otherwise, Sullivan drags it out long enough. But what you would have to worry about is that a Biden Justice Department would not withdraw the motion to dismiss and would want Flynn to get set. Andrew McCarthy, riding at the National View Online about the ordeal of Michael Flynn continuing It is un ending. And, of course, that's part of the national political scandal right now is that the poison of 2016 is in the system and we can't get rid of it. Not easily. We can snap our fingers. The law is inadequate. The Constitution is inadequate. The poison remains. I'm John Bachelor. This is.

Judge Sullivan Judge Emmet Sul Michael Flynn Judge Sullivan court of Appeals John Bachelor Department of Justice prosecutor Justice Department Biden Justice Department President Trump National Review Court Andy Andrew McCarthy National View Online
"judge sullivan" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

77WABC Radio

05:44 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

"I'm John Baxter. This is the John Baxter show. Welcome my colleagues, Andrew McCarthy. National view Online that isthe McCotter American greatness. The decision passed down from the D. C court. This is federal Court Court of Appeals returns the Flynn case to the courtroom of Emmet Sullivan, who is you will recall A judge who had the case has signed him right at the end of sentencing. And since then, the Department of Justice has come forward and say to say that they recommend that the case be done away with no longer are we going to pursue this because of Irregularities. Inconsistencies there other diplomatic words, But you will understand mistakes made of in the prosecution and pursuit of of General Flynn in the course of 2016 2017, But here we are again. With a decision from the D. C court, turning the matter back to Judge Sullivan. I did not go to law school as my two colleagues did status and Andy so I'm lost, and Judge Sullivan did not hear the case. Judge Sullivan's courtroom to my understanding. I was lucky or unlucky to have the case land on him. But since then he's been acting irregularly. As far as I understand. He has not wanted to adjudicate this. Finally, he's used words like trees, and I believe he's also Enlisted the ally, his allies to speak against General Flynn, he said, very little himself. But his allies have spoken harshly about the decision by Mr Barr's Department of Justice to do away with the case. I believe at one point there was speculation that they would charged Michael Flynn with perjury or something like that, because he was reversing his plea anyway. It's elaborate, but right now it looks like it will not be adjudicated by election Day. We have less than 60 days to go. Is that Thegame? Andy? Is this about the election? Good evening to you? Good evening, John. Well, it may be about the election for Judge Sullivan. There may be other reasons, too. I don't know that anybody in this equation or that everybody in this equation, John has the same motives. But for all of the things that you just said, and they're all true, he had the judge Sullivan has done many irregular things here. What the Court of appeals. Which we heard this case on bond, meaning that it was all of the active members of the of the court, who were not disqualified from the case. I think there was one who was disqualified. What they what they stress was that no matter what kinds of things he's said he hasn't actually done anything yet of great consequence. That is to say he has not denied the motion to dismiss the case. He hasn't ruled on it at all. And he hasn't even held his hearing yet. So while he's threatened to do all sorts of things, and he's made all kinds of comments that events bias against General Flynn, the Court of Appeals does not want to get away from the regular order of appeal here, and they would rather see Sullivan complete the case. And do whatever it is he's going to do on DH, then have if it's necessary if the case isn't dismissed for some reason, because so doesn't follow the laws and Jake appeal in in the normal course. But they didn't want to jump in and get ahead of that. And to the extent that the timing thing is a big deal, the one thing the Court of Appeals was pretty Explicit about and this was right in the last sentence of their opinion, John. They said they expected himto handle this case with dispatch, which means they expect him to get on with it. Those of us who listen to the oral argument know that one of the things that the court did express. Some concern about was that it was unfair to Flynn for Sullivan to drag his feet on DeLay resolution of the case. Of course, Sullivan, legal counsel at that point said, Well, if you would just left Judge Sullivan alone, he might have decided this case. Back in July, and we'd already be done. And she argued that the reason that was the delay was because Sullivan thought this man Damos petition that is And what would you say to the people who think that Maybe this should go to the Supreme Court for decision? Why is that not likely to happen? Because status the what the Court of Appeals said here was that, you know, basically they are. Court of Review of an appellate court is the Court of Review, not a court of as they put it, first view and not a court that tells the lower quarter of the District court had to resolve a case. What it does is review a case on a full concrete record after rulings have been made, and that's even more true of the Supreme Court than it is of the D C circuit. So I think To get review in the Supreme Court. They have to convince four justices of the Supreme Court that this case should be reviewed. And I think under circumstances where the D C circuit has made a pretty strong argument that Sullivan hasn't even really done Anything yet and where, And I think this is very important where the main aggrieved party here is, is really the Justice Department because what Sullivan was threatening to do was have a hearing where they could inquire into the motives of the Justice Department yet. The Justice Department never thought man Davis here..

Emmet Sullivan Court Court of Appeals Court of appeals General Flynn Supreme Court D. C court John Baxter Court of Review District court Department of Justice Justice Department Andy Andrew McCarthy Mr Barr perjury Jake Davis legal counsel
"judge sullivan" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

03:43 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Welcome back to J secure by this Jordan secular. We are taking your phone calls at 168 for 31 2 That's 106 843110 I do want to take because we have two callers. We'll get back to Flint matter just a moment because that is breaking news that if the full appeals court at the D C circuit so odd Bok will hear the appeal from Judge Sullivan. But from the Court of Appeals three judge panel say What he did was wrong is to follow the guides of the executive branch who decides who to prosecute and who not to prosecute, and he doesn't get to make that decision. And yet the full circuit. Hey, appealed that too, on our bag panel, and they took it And it's much more liberal than I just I'm sitting here thinking and I know and he's gotta be thinking the same thing. The judge is appealing. How in the world and he is the judge appealing. The judge's the judge. He is not the litigant. I can't understand Ajay, a judge who's supposed to be in neutral arbiter in a litigation who has been directed by a panel of the D C circuit to dismiss the Flynn case because the executive branch doesn't want to prosecute. Is now turning around and saying I appeal that decision. Who are you? You were sitting up on the bench in your black rope, making decisions as to whether evidence should be admitted or not admitted granting rulings overruling decisions granting objection, sustaining objections being an umpire. Now you're becoming a litigant in the gaze and you were deciding or want to decide whether or not somebody should be prosecuted. Bring him back to me. Bring him back to me, and I'll decide what punishment if any, to give him And do you think Flynn is going to get a fair shake before Judge Sullivan, who are well What's Neptune planet I'll be living on. This is absurd. The decision to prosecute is an executive function. The D. C circuit panel correctly said that Judge Sullivan, stay out of this case. Do what you're supposed to do. Be the umpire. You're not a prosecutor, and I hope the D C circuit in bank panel. That day in bank court. That is the whole court rules that way, But Jay and Jordan I don't have good feelings about it. I really don't know. I know. I'm very worried about the court. I'm worried about PC, Circa. George. I know I am to be unless they really follow the rules. But you know, that means there were enough of them that want to take this on Bach. To say that they disagreed with the three judge panel and so and with this U S Supreme Court right now, it is very unpredictable. Though this should be very clear cut the previous decision earlier in April, I would feel I feel a little bit more secure it the Supreme Court level. But who knows? I mean, but that's why that's why I've instructed our team to start prepping. I'm sure you and you'll be reviewing the briefs as well. And we'll get that was moving very, very quickly. And literally. People makes him maybe we will see who watched his repairs complete down a little bit. Texting with one of our attorneys bid city about the actual we're about to take the school's issues in Arizona that we've talked about babies early as tomorrow. Which security One more thing down. That we'd have to be prepared right now. Immediately go. It won't be immediate litigation, but we have to be prepared to possibly go to state court. So we're making sure you've got the right council set up there as well. So that I may literally that where that's going on. You're texting attorneys for, you know, to get the flit. Um, because brief ready because this is a very early aural argument. August 11th. Ah and I get this is we could do all of this work..

Judge Sullivan Court of Appeals executive U S Supreme Court Supreme Court Flynn Flint Bok Arizona Ajay prosecutor George Jay Jordan
"judge sullivan" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

02:28 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Said to Judge Sullivan Tio. Your job and he refuses. Justice must be done. But it must also be seen to be done. We with first Amendment champion, Try a lawyer. She is Harmeet Dhillon. I'm Sebastian. Gorka, This is America first. Don't touch that dial. Balance of nature changing the world one life at a time. I started balance of nature, and I think the beginning of this year and I just had my six month follow up on my blood work. Oh my gosh. When the doctor's office called me they were so impressed with the changes in my levels. It's hard to get a doctor excited, But when my doctor saw the blood work, she was excited. So I got it. Credit the fruits and veggies, you know. Balance of nature and considering what I've seen in the blood work, it's well worth the cost experience. The balance of nature difference for yourself right now, balance of nature is offering free shipping and 35% off on any new preferred order. Call 802 468751 That's 802 4687 51 or by going to balance of nature dot com and make sure to receive this special radio offer by using discount code Golden Gates. This's Michael Medved. Michael medved dot com. For townhall, the entertainment industry regularly ignores a common sense lesson. You can't connect with a mass audience by insulting a figure they revere multiple reports indicate the upcoming film Habit features Paris Jackson as a lesbian, Jesus and object of fixation for a drug addicted party girl. A petition by Christian believers to block the dubious film's release has already drawn nearly half 1,000,000 signatures and its box office potential looks distinctly limited. Adding to the irony Paris Jackson, The film star was raised from age 11 by her grandmother, a devout Jehovah's Witness and mother of 10. Meanwhile, Disney's film version of the musical masterpiece, Hamilton has said streaming records and draw near universal praise with its sympathetic portrayal of wrapping dancing founding fathers like Alexander Hamilton and George Washington. An obvious conclusion. You can attract more filmgoers by respecting their values, then by assaulting them public policy, not pepper, dine dot e. D u Israel.

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

02:09 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Say this too today usually be on the air would be playing the bears sing Happy Birthday song he's not on the air today but let me tell you just because he's on the air does not mean he's not working in fact he's probably talking some of the more powerful people in the world if you get my drift but it is my dad's birthday so Happy Birthday dad and if you want to express kind of you know Happy Birthday I'm sure you know you can do it through social media is Facebook page Twitter places like that it's also my parents anniversary yes they got married on my dad's birthday so happy anniversary to my mom and dad in the in Happy Birthday dad I just want you to know while it basically always taken a day off for his birthday and that seems nice he's not he's working hard he's Texas while we're on the air he's provide info he's just not able to be on the broadcast today I want it right before I go back to the calls we're going to go to the this law out of Oklahoma the Vince is the Walter Weber really helped the Oklahoma legislature with a state senator David Bullard and the governor Kevin Stitt says still to alternately I sign this into law it will be challenged but it but it was a great victory I will get to that in in just a minute let me encourage you I just want to take another call on judge Sullivan because we've got Hary with this Mary Ellen's call from elite Illinois judge solvent will be in court on Friday so in a couple days Mary Ellen welcome to J. secular life welcome and happy anniversary and birthday to your dad question is this not judge Sullivan trying to set up like an like you were talking earlier about an alternative prosecuted but like a whole different or an additional justice system that doesn't really exist well I wanna I wanna play the sound from bill Barr he made sure he he discussed exactly what you kind of keep it on Mary Ellen about judge Sullivan trying to become the prosecutor take a listen he mentioned in case.

Texas Oklahoma Walter Weber David Bullard Kevin Stitt Mary Ellen prosecutor Facebook Twitter senator judge Sullivan Illinois bill Barr
"judge sullivan" Discussed on WMAL 630AM

WMAL 630AM

12:30 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on WMAL 630AM

"Ninety right all right all right we've got this audio here that I want to play right this is a this is become big story last week and this is where judge Sullivan in the Flynn case the Michael Flynn case when both the prosecution and the defense said the okay let's dismiss he said no I want to get a because of briefs from outside parties and I want to bring in enemy because retired judge who is going to tell me whether I can charge or suggest to me I'm not really sure what it is yeah it suggests to me give me a nudge or show me the path or I could possibly charge Michael Flynn with perjury for changing his plea yeah and I mean it's just in buzz zero world I I've seen a few on the left attempts to justify in say the judge is correct on this the judge does not anybody who is being intellectually honest knows this judge is way way out of bounds well yesterday Linda Turney said the pile fire the red or filed not fired filed the writ of mandamus and a request to remove the judge from the case she was on fox news last night here's what she had to say about John Sullivan and this case I wish I knew what was going on with that style of another I can't say that I do other than he has gone way out into left field by himself as we say in our mandamus petition on the notion that he can appoint and stuff and I make up for himself and solicit other makers brace and not rule on our motions on the government's motion to dismiss which we consented to the law is clear there's a new Supreme Court decision unanimously decided just within the last two weeks that makes it clear he cannot invite the Americans for a study has he doesn't have that authority as a District Court judge and then there are spring court and DC circuit cases that make clear he must grant the motion to dismiss but the government made that's the case in controversy issue under the constitutional separation of powers issue under the constitution and the law is clear it doesn't have authority to granite he can't appoint a prosecutor himself the case is over and his biases so egregious he should be removed from the case there you go yeah principal I think it's very simple you know you spell out what the law is and and we talked about that we you know it's clear desperation here there's there's there's very little prosecutorial power that a judge has content is basically it and that's that's a reach there is there is no bridge between anything that was done by the defense team and content there is no bridge there it didn't happen because if it did then the judge would have brought it up at the time would have worn the defense training whether it's the current defense team whether the former attorneys for Flynn and that's how that would have played out it would've happened days after the justice department look to dismiss and I want to make an analogy between this and what William Barr said yesterday or two days ago and when it when a he spoke about the the the investigation into the origins of of Russian collusion and said that as of this date he does not foresee as of that day from what he has seen so far he doesn't believe that there will probably be criminal charges or criminal investigation or make sure I get this right against the former president or vice president and you had to end and he explained look there's a difference between abuse of power and a federal crime right and what might there be abuse of power yeah if the president knew this was all going on now if there was a lot breaking and the president didn't know what was going on it's still abuse of power right if he didn't know the lawbreaking was going on then you can tie it to him my point is here with the judge what the judge is doing is absolutely unconstitutional it's an abuse of judicial power yeah right it's not a criminal federal offense right what he is doing the judge won't go to jail for this abuse of power look Democrats no abuse of power if they impeach the president on it mmhm and you would every Democrat senator vote to impeach on it so I've used the power can still be serious and not rise by the way was bogus not their friend to beget I'd write it was bogus on the Democrats and but the fact is abuse of power is something that is still serious even if doesn't rise to the level of a federal crime and it can be unconstitutional you can violate somebody's rights because of it yeah and somebody can file a civil suit and win money at times when this happens when there is prosecutorial misconduct yeah I'm in you know in the end so it's important for people to understand is the media saying this completely clears the former president completely clears by no what now the information shows is they were involved in it now if remember bar says that they're looking at others for criminal activity and so in you know it in any event ministration you can have all right we want you to do this one to look into what's going on here and it may be a political motive and it may be dirty tricks and if somebody breaks the law and you don't know that they break the law and you don't ask whether they break the law you can you can do have basically put up that wall of immunity for yourself yeah or you can say because this is the other question here with when you look at the the email that Susan rice wrote to herself her heart was the whole intent to set up call me that was on social media yesterday this seems to be a thing of going okay let call me take this let call me take this wrong well I mean no I mean the only reason honestly on the way out the door thank you write yourself an email knowing it would be found knowing it's an official paper trail is to cover your own backside and have some plausible well try to build plausible deniability and it in that case think about this I'm and and we don't know but I think it's a reasonable theory that if it was thought I mean gosh you know you have your the acting Attorney General looking at that case going what what what what Sally H. on January fifth going basically trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together in a conversation where she had been briefed on the details and she's kind of oh wait what's going on here it's reasonable to believe that rice looked at at the situation and said these people are out of control that what they're doing I don't agree with and I really want no part of and essentially that would be throwing call me under the proverbial bus I don't know that that's what happened I don't know that's what her intent was but there's a reason it's highly unusual to write an email to yourself you know what you're doing you're setting up a paper trail to be found well Dave this suspicion is I she got nervous yeah and when we haven't protected the president I'm not I need there's the other part of it well we don't charge I'll talk about these ago yet we might not have protected the president or put up this wall of immunity right you know if for the president and the vice president because of everything I know I am going to write this note now to ensure that the last record that we have an official notice shows that the president was doing the right thing because why didn't she do it that day or the day after exact why was it just what hours before it was it was it was it was on the twentieth was yeah it was hours before dawn nordictrack bright it was hours before trump took so why would you do with that why would that be the last thing was something was coming either it's you or somebody communicate about a year ago or somebody directed her or suggested that she deals suggested that look we need to make sure that we cover our posteriors here ends up because why would you send an email to yourself right that's the entire thing the email wasn't sent to somebody else to communicate outside you're trying to create a paper trail it's a bread crumb and and here's the thing to you look at the nature of what happened on the twelfth on the twelfth just eight days before that Obama opened up communications between the intelligence agencies that to me was creating Flack it was creating this huge smokescreen so that there could be multiple messages being sent about what was going on all this essentially massive a massive number of communications this is what Evelyn Farkas talked about we had to make sure we got it out of it again we don't know whether or not she knew what was true and accurate we don't know but the point was the effort what's to get to open up the line of communications well again I think it's a reasonable theory to say that you do that so that there are so many communications the leaker isn't found it's harder to find you're creating you're creating a massive haystack instead of that one small group that that was that was there before and here's the other possibility because it we've told you we've always looked at that as as investigators and not political right did call me and did Brennan and did clapper over the period of months were they communicating with the president and telling him that the dossier they thought was that they believed was real right did they tell look this thing is real mistras it intact did they lied to the to to former president Obama I don't know I'm just a look I'm not trying to let anybody off the hook here I'm as we told you from the very beginning we look at this as investigators and we asked this question with Evelyn Farkas did call me did Brenda did clapper tell all these people this is legit and they were believed and therefore people acted on that belief that these guys wouldn't lie to was and they would tell us the truth and they were lying to them and that's what happened and that's what we said was a huge conspiracy or they were just a few people involved in it and promote said look we're credible let's promoted to everybody from Evelyn Farkas to let's the president and was that why the president opened up all the intelligence agencies is because he actually believes the dossier was true right and at the time he did that I believe what was it what was the first day was it January twelfth with the first of where where where the FBI was warned or was officially that the UP I was warned that the dossier might be bogus as of the twelfth of the seventeenth I was good yeah I've got a date yet but it was in that price range and in that it will definitely was there it was definitely there by the time you got to the end of of Obama's term yeah by the time you got to rise and rise writing that email yeah it wasn't that it was there and and again what I think because if you're an outgoing president think about the the whole idea behind what they did during the campaign if they believed or knew in their hearts remember there was always a twenty percent chance he was going to win if they believed she was going to win then okay it's plausible to say well bomber didn't have a problem with it but then all the.

judge Sullivan Michael Flynn
"judge sullivan" Discussed on KNST AM 790

KNST AM 790

02:19 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on KNST AM 790

"You if you really think Michael Flynn if you agree with this corrupt Daddy judge Sullivan but Flynn is committed treason and you think he should swing then by all means give me a call one eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two there's a lot on on since being talked about that and if you can give me a best shot and I'm happy to explain why old wrong and you should actually be scared if judges are off to the prosecution is withdrawn from the case I'm now willing to keep it going that should worry you very much actual within judicial news we have a legal for us also from the common law world to which the United States just about belong still though very tenuously Singapore for the first time in history a man has been sentenced to death by a zoom this is Paul Cooney turn Dennis on the thirty seven year old mother lay whom the judge in Singapore has sentenced to death for a his role in a twenty eleven heroin transaction but because of all the corona virus than not having court house hearings as such so that now doing it by zoom and this man Mr Denison has become the first person to be sentenced to death by zoom that's a point that maybe judge Sullivan judge Solomon is so eager to convict even without a prosecutor he's eager he he's eager to convict Michael Flynn of treason so maybe he can just the next time you decide to go into court he can just call up Sydney Powell on the zoom and sentenced Michael Flynn to death for treason by zoom as has happened to this poor fellow in Singapore Markstein for rush we're gonna follow the developments in the corrupt transition period all the machinations the Obama administration's banana Republic corruption in crippling the incoming administration I'm gonna bring you up to date on all the looks down details and the coronavirus one eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two you're listening to the EIB network.

Michael Flynn judge Sullivan United States Dennis Singapore Mr Denison judge Sullivan judge Solomon prosecutor Sydney Powell Singapore Markstein Obama administration Paul Cooney heroin banana Republic EIB
"judge sullivan" Discussed on WCBM 680 AM

WCBM 680 AM

03:26 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on WCBM 680 AM

"You if you really think Michael Flynn if you agree with this corrupt Daddy judge Sullivan that Flynn is committed treason and you think you should swing then by all means give me a call one eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two there's a lot on on since being talked about that and if you can give me a best shot and I'm happy to explain why old wrong and you should actually be scared if judges are off to the prosecution has withdrawn from the case I'm now willing to keep it going that should worry you very much actually what we do in judicial news we have a legal for us also from the common law world tour with Trisha the United States just about belong still though very tenuously Singapore for the first time in history a man has been sentenced to death by a zoom this is Paul Cooney turn Dennis on the thirty seven year old mother lay whom the judge in Singapore has sentenced to death for a his role in a twenty eleven heroin transaction **** because of all the corona virus than not having court house hearings as such so they're now doing it by zoom and this man Mr Denison has become the first person to be sentenced to death by zoom that's a point that maybe judge Sullivan judge Solomon is so eager to convict even without a prosecutor he's eager he he's eager to convict Michael Flynn of treason so maybe he can just the next time you decide to go into court he can just call up Sidney Powell on the zoom and sentence Michael Flynn to death for treason by zoom as has happened to this poor fellow in Singapore Markstein for rush we're going to follow the developments in the corrupts a transition period all the machinations the Obama administration's banana Republic corruption in crippling the incoming administration I'm gonna bring up to date on all the locks down details and the coronavirus one eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two you're listening to the EIB network Sebastian Gorka again for relief factor the one hundred percent drunk three supplement with full key ingredients in each help your own body deal with information and the pain that happens as a result of aging exercise or just everyday living I struggled with lower back pain until I gave really factor a try and now I'm telling as many people as I can to order the three week quick stop for just nineteen ninety five the owners of really factor Pete and settled but tell me about seventy percent of people who try the three week quick stop from nineteen ninety five go on to order more which is amazing now it's not just me but tens of thousands of people particularly factor everyday nineteen ninety five is less than a dollar a day to see if we can get you out of pain and after that about the cost of a Cup of coffee a day to stay out of pain time now out of pain and it's very possible you could be too good only factor dot com or call eight hundred five hundred eighty three eighty four new beginnings restoration.

Michael Flynn judge Sullivan
"judge sullivan" Discussed on Newsradio 1200 WOAI

Newsradio 1200 WOAI

03:28 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on Newsradio 1200 WOAI

"You if you really think Michael Flynn if you agree with this corrupt Duddy judge Sullivan that Flynn is committed treason and you think he should swing then by all means give me a call one eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two there's all other nonsense being talked about that and if you can give me a best shot and I'm happy to explain why old wrong and you should actually be scared if judges are off to the prosecution is withdrawn from the case are now willing to keep it going that should worry you very much I actually didn't judicial news we have a legal for us also from the common law well two weeks yeah the United States just about belong still though very tenuously Singapore for the first time in history a man has been sentenced to death by a zoom this is bowled need turn Dennis on the thirty seven year old mother lay whom the judge in Singapore has sentenced to death for a his role in a twenty eleven heroin transaction bunch because of all the corona virus than not having courthouse hearings as such so let down doing it by zoom and this man Mr Denison has become the first person to be sentenced to death by zoom that's a point that maybe judge Sullivan judge Solomon is so eager to convict even without a prosecutor he's eager he he's eager to convert to Michael Flynn of treason so maybe he can just the next time you decide to go into court he can just a call up Sidney Powell on the zoom and sentence Michael Flynn to death for treason by zoom as has happened to this poor fellow in Singapore Markstein from rush we're going to follow the developments in the corrupt transition period all the machinations the Obama administration's banana Republic corruption in crippling the incoming administration I'm gonna bring you up to date on all the locks down details and the coronavirus one eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two you're listening to the EIB network news radio twelve hundred W. Sebastian Gorka again for relief factor the one hundred percent drunk three supplement with full key ingredients of each help your own body deal with inflammation and the pain that happens as a result of aging exercise or just everyday living I struggled with lower back pain until I gave really factor a try and now I'm telling as many people as I can to order the three week quick stop for just nineteen ninety five the owners of really factor PTS have told to tell me about seventy percent of people who tried to three week quick stop for nineteen ninety five go on to order more which is amazing now it's not just me but tens of thousands of people particularly factor every day nineteen ninety five is less than a dollar a day to see if we can get you out of pain and after that about the cost of a Cup of coffee a day to stay out of pain I'm now out of pain and it's very possible you could be too good only factor dot com or call eight hundred five hundred eighty three eighty four these days being a small business means.

Michael Flynn judge Sullivan Duddy
"judge sullivan" Discussed on 106.1 FM WTKK

106.1 FM WTKK

02:04 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 106.1 FM WTKK

"The charges they say he's not objective and they say he is creating a political spectacle they right in the midst of a national election season the district judges drag the cord into the political hurricane now playing the legal team also insist judge Sullivan be removed from the case and the court immediately halted unusual move to allow a friend of the court a K. a specially appointed judge to argue against the justice department's request to drop the case fox's Gillian Turner in Washington doubts cast on a recently touted coronavirus vaccine weight down Wall Street Tuesday the Dow dropped three hundred ninety points Asian stocks closing Wednesday mixed Dow futures are trading about one hundred thirty points higher America is listening to fox news C. mainly cloudy skies we got through that item ever some light rain showers are possible at times live dropping down into the low to mid fifties occasional rain and gusty northeast wind as we had throughout Wednesday with a high only around sixty I'm meteorologist mark so that from the weather channel on one oh six one FM talk next news in thirty minutes follow us on social media go to one oh six one FM talk dot com to connect you are a very smart receptive audience and I'm a smart teacher classes are boring now and again tomorrow at noon and you know it presents me with a challenge void being repetitious because of the philosophy doesn't change on one oh six one FM talk stay connected the twenty twenty graduation is unlike any other but we still have our traditions so T. mobile the supporting I heart radio's commencement podcast imports with DJ calla to create the toss your cap challenge on tick tock for every toss your cat video T. mobile will donate another five dollars the nonprofit jobs for America's graduates up to two hundred thousand dollars I heart radio commencement podcast is out now listen on the I heart radio out or whatever you get your podcasts and check out team mobiles foster cats challenge the class of twenty twenty.

judge Sullivan justice department fox Gillian Turner America mark Washington
"judge sullivan" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

77WABC Radio

13:12 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

"All right we've got this audio here that I want to play all right this is a this is become big story last week and this is where judge Sullivan in the Flynn case the Michael Flynn case when both the prosecution and the defense said the okay let's dismiss he said no I want to get a because of briefs from outside parties and I want to bring in enemy kiss retired judge who is going to tell me whether I can charge or suggest to me I'm not really sure what it is yeah it suggests to me give me a nudge or show me the path or I could possibly charge Michael Flynn with perjury for changing his plea yeah and I mean it's just in boys soccer world I I've seen a few on the left attempts to justify in say the judges correct on this the judge does not anybody who is being intellectually honest knows this judge is way way out of bounds well yesterday Lynn's attorney Sidney Powell fired the red earth filed not fired filed the writ of mandamus and and a request to remove the judge from the case she was on fox news last night here's what she had to say about judge Sullivan and this case I wish I knew what was going on with John Sullivan I can't say that I do other than he has gone way out into left field by himself as we say in our mandamus petition on this notion that he can appoint and stuff and make us for himself and solicit other makers briefs and not rule on our motion from the government's motion to dismiss which we consented to the law is clear there's a new Supreme Court decision unanimously decided just within the last two weeks that makes it clear he cannot invite the Amigas brief to the house and he doesn't have that authority as a District Court judge and then there are spring court and DC circuit cases that make clear he must grant the motion to dismiss but the government made that's a case in controversy issue under the constitutional separation of powers issue under the constitution and the law is clear eight doesn't have authority to granite he can't appoint a prosecutor himself the case is over and his biases so egregious he should be removed from the case there you go principal I think it's very simple you know you spell out what the law is and and we talked about that we you know it's clear desperation here there's there's there's very little prosecutorial power that a judge has contempt is basically it and that's that's a reach there is there is no bridge between anything that was done by the defense team and content there is no bridge there it didn't happen because if it did then the judge would have brought it up at the time would warn the defense team whether it's the current defense team whether the former attorneys for Flynn and that's how that would have played out it would've happened days after the justice department look to dismiss and I want to make an analogy between this and what William Barr said yesterday or two days ago and when it when a he spoke about the the the investigation into the origins of our Russian collusion and said that as of this date he does not foresee as of that day from what he has seen so far he doesn't believe that there will probably be criminal charges or criminal investigation or make sure I get this right against the former president or vice president and you had it and and he explained look there's a difference between abuse of power and a federal crime right and what might there be abuse of power yeah if the president knew this was all going on now if there was lawbreaking and the president didn't know what was going on it's still abuse of power right if he didn't know the lawbreaking was going on then you can't tie it to him my point is here with the judge what the judge is doing is absolutely unconstitutional it's an abuse of judicial power yeah right it's not a criminal federal offense right what he is doing the judge won't go to jail for this abuse of power look Democrats no abuse of power and if they impeached a president on it mmhm and you would every Democrat senator vote to impeach on it so abuse of power can still be serious and not rise by the way was bogus out there cranking to beget I'd write it was bogus on the Democrats and but the fact is abuse of power is something that is still serious even if doesn't rise to the level of a federal crime and it can be unconstitutional you can violate somebody's rights because of it yeah and somebody can file a civil suit and win money at times when this happens when there is prosecutorial misconduct yeah in in you know in the end so it's important for people to understand is the media's saying this completely clears the former president completely clears Biden no what now the information shows is they were involved in it now if remember bar says that they're looking at others for criminal activity mmhm and so in you know in a in a M. ministration you can have all right we want you to do this one to look into what's going on here and it may be a political motive in it may be dirty tricks and if somebody breaks the law and you don't know that they break the law and you don't ask whether they break the law you can you can we have basically put up that wall of immunity for yourself yeah or you can sit because this is the other question here with when you look at the the but email that Susan rice wrote to herself her heart was the whole intent to set up call me that was on social media yesterday this seems to be a thing of going okay let call me take this let call me take this all well I mean no I mean the only reason honestly on the way out the door thank you write yourself an email knowing it would be found knowing it's an official paper trail is to cover your own backside and have some plausible while trying to build plausible deniability and it in that case think about this I'm N. and we don't know but I think it's a reasonable theory that if it was thought I mean gosh you know you have the the acting Attorney General looking at that case going whoa whoa whoa Sally Yates on January fifth going basically trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together in a conversation where she hadn't been briefed on the details and she's kind of oh wait what's going on here it's reasonable to believe that rice looked at at the situation and said these people are out of control that what they're doing I don't agree with and I really want no part of and essentially that would be throwing call me under the proverbial bus I don't know that that's what happened I don't know that's what her intent was but there's a reason it's highly unusual to write an email to yourself you know what you're doing you're setting up a paper trail to be found well Dave this suspicion is she got nervous yeah and when we haven't protected the president I'm not I need there's the other part of it yeah we don't charge I'll talk about these ago yet we might not have protected the president or put up this wall of immunity right you know if for the president and the vice president because of everything I know I am going to write this note now to ensure that the last record that we have an official notice shows that the president was doing the right thing because why didn't she do it that day or the day after exact why was it just what hours before it was it was it was it was on the twentieth was yeah it was hours before dawn nordictrack bright it was hours before trump took so why would you do with that why would that be the last thing was something was coming either it's you or somebody communicate about a year ago or somebody directed her or suggested that she deal suggested that look we need to make sure that we cover our posteriors here and so because why would you send an email to yourself right that's the entire thing the email wasn't sent to somebody else to communicate outside you're trying to create a paper trail it's a bread crumb and and here's the thing to you look at the nature of what happened on the twelfth on the twelfth just eight days before that Obama opened up communications between the intelligence agencies that to me was creating Flack it was creating this huge smoke screen so that there could be multiple messages being sent about what was going on all this essentially massive a massive number of communications this is what Evelyn Farkas talked about we had to make sure we got it out of it again we don't know whether or not she knew what was true and accurate we don't know but the point was the effort what's to get to open up the line of communications well again I think it's a reasonable theory to say that you do that so that there are so many communications the leaker isn't found it's harder to find you're creating you're creating a massive haystack instead of that one small group that that was that was there before and here's the other possibility because it we've told you we've always looked at that as as investigators and not political right did call me and did Brennan and did clapper over the period of months were they communicating with the president and telling him that the dossier they thought was that they believed was real right did they tell look this thing is real mistranslated by did they lied to the to to former president Obama I don't know I'm just a look I'm not trying to let anybody off the hook here and as we told you from the very beginning we look at this as investigators and we asked this question with Dublin Farkas did call me did Brenda did clapper tell all these people this is legit and they were believed and therefore people acted on that belief that these guys wouldn't light it was and they would tell us the truth and they were lying to them and that's what happened and that's what we said was a huge conspiracy or they're just a few people involved in it and permit said look we're credible let's promoted to everybody from Evelyn Farkas to let's the president and was that why the president opened up all the intelligence agencies is because he actually believed the dossier was true right and at the time he did that I believe what was said what was the first day was it January twelfth with the first where where where the FBI was warned or was officially that the UP I was warned that the dossier might be bogus as of the twelfth of the seventeenth I was good yeah I forgot that yeah but it was in that price range and in that it will definitely was there it was definitely there by the time you got to the end of of Obama's term yeah by the time you got to prison rights writing that email yeah it was and yeah it was there and and again what I think because if you're an outgoing president think about the the whole idea behind what they did during the campaign if they believed or knew in their hearts remember there was always a twenty percent chance he was going to win if they believed she was going to win then okay it's plausible to say well bomb didn't have a problem with it but then all the sudden if if you look at what was going on and then you're you're in January the last days of his presidency and he knows what's going on he's either gonna have to play a massive cover up game or we have to consider the possibility that he wasn't aware that it wasn't legit at that point nobody had told him keep in mind too what the intelligence agencies say during the time he was president they said many of the memos and briefings the information from between intelligence on the ground and the president was getting changed no yeah member yet remember that so right again if that's true and accurate we have to consider any and all the above eight six six ninety right I coming up more.

judge Sullivan Michael Flynn
"judge sullivan" Discussed on Newsradio 1200 WOAI

Newsradio 1200 WOAI

10:17 min | 1 year ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on Newsradio 1200 WOAI

"Got to talk about the Michael Flynn and judge Sullivan thing and I have to say that I'm gonna be asking questions because I really don't know that much because as I was talking to Patrick before we started on the air I was like I don't get it why would judge Sullivan saying that he you know he there's still the possibility of him going to jail I thought all of the charges against Flynn were dropped can you give us a little bit of background first on the whole Flynn case if anybody doesn't know about it so the quick background is general Michael Flynn was charged with making a false statement to a federal agent he alternately pleading guilty of that and is guilty plea was later affirmed what came out later though after his plea was entered was that the FBI had engaged in arguable misconduct and more importantly certain material aspects of the case weren't disclosed to journal plans defense team so his plea they argued was annoying because he didn't get in the facts of it but he didn't know all the circumstances of the case before he entered his plea so he's seeking to withdraw the plea and then more lately the government headed by Attorney General bill barber decided that they were just going to drop the case so they moved to dismiss the case now the government can't just drop the case that's what I didn't get I thought it was just done no and this is the same on the state level and when when we were prosecutors we couldn't just make the case go away we had to file a motion to dismiss the case and all it's a very rare that a court would ever not grant that motion but in this case judge Sullivan is but currently dragging its feet on ruling on the motion and doesn't seem to want to grant the motion even though both the defense and the government are urging it before him well would there be a reason for that there's a lot to unpack their so Patrick gave a great synopsis about the legal and the fact that basis on this case okay so then people always ask us when we have these discussions and they have been why would he plead guilty if you did nothing wrong why are you saying don't do anything wrong now and now judge Sullivan to add to Patrick's synopsis wants to hold either just a general Flynn in contempt or or guilty of perjury somehow and we're kind of unclear exactly what the hell he's doing but we're gonna have to unpack a lot of this so why would you J. general Flynn plead guilty if he's innocent this happens all the time when you when you specially when you're dealing with federal sentencing guidelines and and and that the federal government coming after a citizen accused him in general flat that time from when everything that we've seen them in out we didn't know if we have personal knowledge of this he was out of money his defense team and it's very very expensive to to to properly defend federal cases because of the often as a man you know just did the did the gravity of exactly what you're facing the sentencing guidelines what will will we usually warrant someone going to be it to be present incarcerated far longer if they try a case and lose versus handling it pre trial so there is they call it taxing somebody for trial it is the term is that of the legal term artificial term if you get taxed for going to trial sometimes in state court but usually when you go to a jury for punishment the jury can do with the jury wants to do but in federal sentencing that the judge will do the punishment after a guilty plea online and so and then also there was an allegation that they threaten that they would try to indict his son with their sons guilty or not who the hell wants your kid to go to what you're going through whether you will wear the governance of what's going on financially emotionally reputation everything so as a dad he made a choice he says look number one I didn't have the funds to to properly continue to defend myself number two there's a strong chance these guys and get probation versus prison time if you would a plaid beforehand and three just the fact that it would save my son the heartache and all the stress and emotion and having to go through what I've gone through with there isn't anything wrong or not which it seems the alt all indications is them did not do anything wrong I have no evidence that on the contrary but just that alone so that that was the I know in part then you couple that on top of that with evidence of Brady ever in a Brady evidence meaning evidence that could have been used to the show that he was innocent and or cross examine witnesses against them exculpatory evidence essentially and so that is huge and then what we discover in these notes should scare the crap out of people what did you what we found in those in those notes when all that evidence was being released about what the intent of the investigatory agency the FBI in this case I was trying to do the higher ups from call me and this is not political I mean patronize analysis this morning and always have been is with a blindfold on the lady justice wears and we can talk about what that means later on but this has nothing to do with partisanship this has nothing to do with party this has to do with principles they will affect all the people in this country if we don't watch ourselves okay so now that we're at the point you've explained it all then enters judge Sullivan and when you say that it's not political it it it is him dragging his feet on dismissing this case but is it political what would be a reason that a judge looking at the facts would want to hire you know special attorney to come in and do more investigations what would be the ulterior motive I thought the judge was supposed to look at the facts yeah we're kind of in uncharted territory because this this is never happened before that at that anything of my research would reveal where both parties to a case are asking the court to dismiss the case and the court says no I want to hear from I wanna hear from some friends of the court that MEK phrase you may have heard amicus and they may come in and talk to me about why should or shouldn't do something and judge someone took the other extraordinary step of specifically appointing an a an attorney a retired judge John Gleeson to come in and by the way judge Gleason is is kind of the impressive figure is the guy who brought down the Gandhi family and back when he was a prosecutor Han but his job is to come in and briefed the court about why the judge should or shouldn't grant this the government's motion to dismiss and then whether there is there some sort of grounds for finding a judge when in contempt or bring some sort of perjury case against him but the problem we have here is is the judge Gleason number one already has an opinion about general Flynn he stated that before the problem number two that really is problem number one judge Sullivan has precedence in his own court he's made statements before the no assault party should be influencing decisions by this court many's taking that position before again Karen you've heard me say this before we have to look for logical consistency and is our position violate Aristotle's law of non contradiction so you can be contradictory because then your hypocrite by definition and you have to be logically consistent like we always say we have to resign ourselves to the truth so judge Sullivan has taken a position before which is the right position before look I don't want any out favors you're the judge for a reason you got a point in your the guy on the road that's number one but number two then you're bringing in a guy that has already made a decision about the citizen accused that that's by definition not an impartial did decision maker or influencer in this case it would be and then number three to Patrick's point this is unprecedented this is never been done before this is absolutely insane because play this out so what the hell you gonna do judge Sullivan with all due respect so then you make a decision not to sign the dismissal or not to grant the motion to dismiss now what now what if the government versus general Flynn it's not judge Sullivan versus plan it's the state of Texas versus jondo it's not who have not to complain it's not anybody else if the moving prospects agency representing the citizens of either the good the nation or the community moving forward against the citizen accused that's the way it works and so I know you have a question well I have a question for you because I keep on thinking what would be the what would he gain from prolonging this that's one question the second one it is in saying that he's doing something well not legal but it is it is strange that he's doing something that has never been done before but this whole case is about that FBI agents trying to trap somebody into like do we want him to lose his job do we want to get out of here and so everything that is respected characters that we can assume that all the listeners no eggs all the details of this case notes came out with the F. first of all there was an investigation and general Flynn he was incoming he was gonna be the national security adviser right Patrick that's right and if we get a duty to speak to other countries it was all recorded they knew what the conversation at the question and so there's an argument there that we talked about two weeks ago but entrapment about that that entrapment argument of whether they win in there trying to get him to commit a crime other than that's good Tory agencies law enforcement goes there to investigate whether a crime was committed not to encourage a crime to be committed not they told the committed but you don't try to get someone to commit a crime and there's actual notes the two things number one general Flynn they said there's nothing that we will find nothing they did anything wrong McCabe I believe Patrick people made conclusions of that then they were gonna do we're gonna say let's end the investigation and then of course that very infamous person Peter Stoger whatever his name is the guy it's an embarrassment to all law enforcement interest is objectively and he he said don't do it the higher ups don't want you to end the investigation along we found no evidence on this guy would let's move on now there's no evidence of it will just keep it open and then they go in about a recorded conversation to see Dick to quote unquote get into line and that's not my words or anybody commentators were there the note that's their notes do we go in there to get him fired a process to get him to get on the line to find the truth well you that's a stupid question you're always in there investigating to uncover the truth and if a crime was committed but if you have someone higher up that has made a determination and no crime has been committed and then you're out there continuing if it questions the motives so that's more context that break in my missing something Patrick no I think you got it it's a great summer but then it goes up to the judge if there is nothing found then why does the investigation go back to where we left off our conversation so now the judge doesn't find sign the motion to dismiss as want to give.

Michael Flynn Patrick judge Sullivan
"judge sullivan" Discussed on KNST AM 790

KNST AM 790

03:40 min | 2 years ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on KNST AM 790

"Saying about impeachment. What he's now saying about impeachment Basting impeachment question of impeachment. Cover up. Why not move to begin impeachment? Storm clouds of impeachment talk of impeachment growing ramping up talk of impeachment ramping up impeachment pressure, new pressure to start the impeachment process or not the latest polls show, nearly six in ten Democrats support impeachment. Americans are evenly split on impeaching President Trump battle over impeachment impeaching peach impeachment. Hearing peach mint here. He's been preceded impeachable conduct impeachable offenses. Nancy Pelosi is not ruling out. Impeachment. Nancy Pelosi was just asked about impeachment a short time ago. But what was he facing calls growing calls calls for impeachment to begin impeachment proceedings? Do you wanna be impeached? Hat tip newsbusters. That's sickening. Meanwhile, we're learning more and more. More and more about how Mr. Muller and his den of thieves. Have lied to the American people. As more time goes by more information is released. Judge Sullivan had a transcript released evolving. John, now, one time a lawyer for the president. And is completely different from the edited version that was put in the Muller report. Did you hear this on CNN today? Will you don't know? You don't listen. Do I MSNBC or so? No, no. You didn't. That's incredible. That this kind of an abuse of power, this kind of unethical action by a lawyer not only goes on punish but goes virtually unnoticed. And he was on with Sean Hannity last night, who the same media wanna destroy shutdown cut. Eight go. What speaker Pelosi has a good point about the difficulty of the PECS. Use me cut five go here. She was counsel for the president to, to find out what was going on. And I'm so glad judge Sullivan ordered the transcript because we don't know the truth. And we also know that this entire report by Muller's of fraud, and we're gonna find more. These six isn't ironic that this man who the dieting and prosecuting people for process crimes. Committed a false statement in his own report by by taking out half my words, they changed the tenor and the contents of their conversation with Robert Keller, and it's an outraged and probably more of it. And he's talking about the lawyer for Lieutenant General Flynn. And some of the judge ordered the entire transcript released. It was quite different. Then what Muller and his team had put in the report, this is why you don't trust a prosecutor without any kind of challenge without any kind of due process without any opposition witnesses, and you discover anything like that. Issuing reports. This is why you don't. And there's been precious little condemnation of this. From former federal prosecutors. From legal analysts from.

Mr. Muller Nancy Pelosi president Judge Sullivan Robert Keller Sean Hannity MSNBC CNN peach Lieutenant General Flynn prosecutor John fraud
"judge sullivan" Discussed on Newsradio 970 WFLA

Newsradio 970 WFLA

02:25 min | 3 years ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on Newsradio 970 WFLA

"Filing today, knowing this judge Sullivan's history, Greg Jarrett, I suspect he's not happy with these tactics. At all, I don't know how he's going to respond any. Prediction. Well, I don't think he's going to be very happy. Let's forget about the fact that there was no basis even interview Flynn. But the McCabe memo. I should is really incendiary in front of a judge that McCabe pushed plan not to have a lawyer, and they deliberately conspired to deceive when that they had a transcript in which he had been illegally unmasked. But but Finally, I, you know, I come back to what I said before this is the first time. We've seen imprint from the FBI that the two agents who interviewed Flynn concluded. He was not lying. And and I think that would be a red flag to any judge. Wait a minute. I've got a defendant here. I wonder if the judge will will look at the fact that they had the full transcript and ask. Well, why was he surveilled why was minimization not practiced and put in place as normal? Why was he unmasked and who? Well, there's always happens with having a conversation with a Russian whether it be a diplomat. Okay. But this supposed to minimize not supposed to unmask or or leak the raw transcript of the last word Andy McCarthy. Well, I think you know, the judge is going to be I would think upset about the whole way that this one forward. But it seems to be Sean the big issue here is that Muller has asked for what the judge is going to impose anyway, which is the minimum sentence, which is probably kill Bachchan general Flynn's gonna get no time. But my point is that general Flynn is gonna get no time because of this aerobic service for thirty years to the country. And yet the story that you don't like the techno I mean, you would not have handled it this way by a long shot. You don't like it. No, I don't like it. And my and I don't like that the way this is gonna play out is that it's gonna look like Flynn got no time because of the great cooperation he provided to the investigation. The meantime that will be true. All right, guys. Thank you very much. When we come back. Bill O'Reilly, Joe konczal coming up..

Flynn Greg Jarrett McCabe FBI Sullivan Andy McCarthy Bill O'Reilly Joe konczal Sean Muller Bachchan thirty years
"judge sullivan" Discussed on KTLK 1130 AM

KTLK 1130 AM

11:24 min | 3 years ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on KTLK 1130 AM

"Wow. What an admission and they didn't warn general Flynn that it would be a crime to lie to the FBI oil. He should have known that. I guess Hillary should have known that a C on a Email main classified. I mean, the double standard always comes into play doesn't it Andy McCarthy is here. Fox News contributor columnist national review. Former assistant US attorney for the southern district of New York Gregg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst all through the number one bestseller the Russia hoax. Andy, let me start with you. I am very disturbed at what is clearly to me a perjury trap for general Flynn because they had the transcript nobody's ever talked about how that was obtained. Why there was no minimization? Why would there was an unmasking? Why there was releasing a raw intelligence, so that's the predicate of all this that nobody discusses in in Muller's submission to the judge. Judge Sullivan today that bothers me telling me he doesn't need a lawyer. That bothers me, you know, purposely going in casually and making a conversational not reminding him. I mean, all of it to me sounds like a setup. Sean, look, I think this stinks. I mean, the it's fair enough to say that Flynn should not have lied to the agents. He admitted in court that he lied to them about a couple of things regarding this did did he did he just admit to it as a plea deal because he had to sell his house. He had no money. Did he admit to it because he was being told behind the scenes that well, we're going to have to investigate you and your son's business if you don't sign this. And he's just says, okay. I'll just take the deal. Maybe he took the deal because it was it is best interest and families best interest to do it not believing. You really lied. I don't think so Sean because his claiming court was that he got hoodwinked into lying. Neither he nor his lawyers are saying that he told the truth. He was asked. Did you ask the Russians through Kislyak not to escalate? The tensions after the Obama. Totally Obama sanctions he denied that. He had said that. But he obviously did say it because it's on the tape, and he denied that the Russian ambassador had told him that they decided not to escalate. Out of Flynn's request. So he's not saying that he told the truth about those things is position in court is that he didn't tell the truth. What they haven't established is why he was questioned in the first place. It's has seemed to me from the very beginning here that there was no predicate to have an investigation of Flynn. There was nothing wrong with Flynn having had those conversations with Kislyak. It was super for them to lie about them. But there was nothing wrong with having them in the first place. And my sense of what happened here is that they intimidated Flynn into thinking that the Logan act which is more fun to seventeen ninety nine law. That has been exercise lose twice though. Not successfully. Yeah. And I think what happened was they made Flynn thinks that he was in real jeopardy if he had had these conversations. And discuss these matters with the Russian ambassador because of the the Logan Logan act, and that Flynn panicked and lied about them. But that doesn't mean they should have been investigating in the first place, and they shouldn't have totally shouldn't have a lawyer. I mean that you don't you don't get to device somebody like that they they shouldn't have told them that. But at the same time, you know, he's a he's the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. And he knows you should lie to FBI agents. I mean, come on. Is there any is there any chance he didn't recollect it? I mean, there's no benefit of the doubt at all here that maybe he didn't have a full recollection shawny could've gone to Toronto where he was that was where he was coming from. But now, but maybe he didn't have the money to sell his house. You can always say at the end of a full state when somebody gets convicted of false statements said it was a failure recollection. He had the the ability to to litigate that I mean, it can't be both that you know. No, it can't be both that if he if he tells them the truth, he should get credit for that. But if he doesn't tell them the truth again, I just I mean. You know, he lied if there was no underlying crime wave if there's no underlying crime claiming Sean he's not claiming now, I'm asking you though, you're saying that he might it was law. I believe he lied. I know I understand that. But if there was no underlying crime. In other words, the Logan. I wouldn't have been applicable and there was nothing wrong with him speaking to his future counterpart actually sounds intelligent to me. And then Komi is threading the needle doing things he wouldn't do in the Bush or Obama administration. Mccain's telling them not to have a lawyer and the ages go in with a strategy that is described in the three zero to make them seem like, they're they're buddies, and blah, blah, blah. It just seems like a setup. It's a perjury trap. I completely agree. It's a perjury trap. Right. Greg. Well, there are a lot of reasons somebody pleads to a process crime that I regard as you know, in the scheme of things are fairly minor thing, especially if prosecutors have cost you to go broke you had to sell your home, and they're threatening to prosecute your son on a different matter. So that changes the equation dramatically. But I look at this three oh two. And what I see here is that the FBI agents Peter Struck and they blank out the other one we know which Joe PM, which Rosenstein continues to hide question, Mark, they say that they had the impression at the time that the defendant was interview that he was not lying, and and they did not think he was line. Now that is the most important part of the fifteen pages of documents that we have we are now seeing it in the three oh to and so my question would be if I were the judge on Tuesday Emmet Sullivan. I would say why did you prosecute this man for line when the agents who interviewed him determined? He wasn't and I would love to hear the answer to that. So that's what jumps out out at me. The most. Andy you want to respond to that? Yeah. I guess, you know, the only thing that you can say about it on the on the line front is. Weather. Somebody tells the truth to agents or not. Is not something that hinges on whether the agents correctly predict or judge that the person who they're talking to seems to be telling the truth or at least trying the only witness. You're the only one. Right. You're leaving out the third witnesses the most important witness, which is the person himself, and if the person himself, it's I lie to you, Greg. And you think I'm telling you the truth. And then two months later, I say I pulled one over on Greg. The fact is I pulled over on you, regardless of whether you thought at the time that I was telling. Limited Alaska serious. I mean is there any chance he decided to plead to a lesser crime of lying, which means he has to say that he lied to get his kid off or to get I you know, he can't afford to lawyers anymore and all that. I mean, you say anything to take your deal know, anything is possible. But the point is you think he lied. He says he lied and his lawyers are saying he lied, and I it doesn't make any sense to me. Right. You would take a position in court that I have been pressured by the FBI I've been hoodwinked into the by the FBI. Okay. Let me ask you. Why wouldn't you Sean? Why wouldn't you just say I didn't lie? Why would you go with? I listen. I agree. I agree with you. But again, under these circumstances, are you at all concerned, a how this was obtained. Meaning they had the transcript I think it's outrageous hell, it was obtained. Are you are you concerned at the FBI tactics here, and that means Komiya McCabe, basically throwing all normal processes out the window to get to this guy when they would never do it in another administration this way. Correct. I think that they had no basis to interview him. I think if you're interviewing a guy for intelligence purposes, you play the tape for him. And then you ask them what this means what that means. And if you're doing it by the book, you call the White House counsel when you say I want to interview the national security because you're describing is an honest way to handle this and. Right. But they didn't do it that way. That's why I think it's a perjury trap. Is that what we're gonna do? But my problem is the perjury trap for thirty three year vet five years of combat is is just it doesn't just rubbed me the wrong way. It makes me sick to my stomach. Right. Have a perjury trap. There's usually perjury involved and the argument with the perjury trap. Is that it shouldn't have happened in the first place? Not that the guy didn't commit the full statement. Greg. Well, in the three zero to document, it it talks about how slim was unguarded, and he was not sophisticated. Those are exact words from the three oh to document. So it it also in mccabe's memo that's attachment a McCabe admits that he's pushing Flynn not to have a lawyer in. He's telling him, you know, if we bring anybody else's room, we got to go through the department of Justice. And and you know, and that is pushing Flynn who goes solo, and they the three oh two makes it clear that they decided ahead of time. Not to tell them about the transcript, so they're setting a mop. It's a perjury trap. Is Andy just said, but I I want to respond to one other thing people plead guilty to lesser crimes all the time. Even though they may not have committed those crimes. And I think that's what happened here. And again this three oh to the interviewing FBI agents, they do plead guilty to something. They didn't do a lesser crime doesn't that mean when they go before the judge they can't say while I'm doing this. I didn't really lie, but I'm doing this. Because this is Mike Lee deal lawyers can make the argument that he was set up that they didn't they pushed him not to have a lawyer. They didn't tell him about the transcript that's all three. Oh to stay right there Andy McCarthy and Greg Jarrett are with us eight hundred nine four one, Sean..

Flynn perjury FBI Sean Greg Jarrett Andy McCarthy Judge Sullivan Obama Komiya McCabe Kislyak Gregg Jarrett Logan Logan Hillary Muller Defense Intelligence Agency New York Fox assistant US attorney Toronto
"judge sullivan" Discussed on KDWN 720AM

KDWN 720AM

11:23 min | 3 years ago

"judge sullivan" Discussed on KDWN 720AM

"What an admission and they didn't warn general Flynn that it will be a crime to lie to the FBI all he should have known that. I guess Hillary should have known that a C on a Email main classified. I mean, the double standard always comes into play doesn't it Andy McCarthy is here. Fox News contributor columnist national review. Former assistant US attorney for the southern district of New York Gregg Jarrett, Fox News legal analyst all through the number one bestseller the Russia hoax. Andy, let me start with you. I am very disturbed at what is clearly to me a perjury trap for general Flynn because they had the transcript nobody's ever talked about how that was obtained. Why there was no minimization? Why would there was an unmasking? Why there was a raw intelligence? So that's the predicate of all this that nobody discusses in in Muller submission to the judge. Judge Sullivan today that bothers me telling me doesn't need a lawyer. That bothers me, you know, purposely going in casually and making a conversational not reminding him. I mean, all of it to me sounds like a setup. Sean, look, I think this stinks. I mean, the it's fair enough to say that Flynn should not have lied to the agents. He admitted in court that he lied to them about a couple of things regarding this. But did he just admit to it as a plea deal because he had to sell his house? He had no money. Did he admit to it because he was being told behind the scenes that well, we're going to have to investigate you and your son's business if you don't sign this. And he just says, okay. I'll just take the deal. Maybe he took the deal because it was in his best interest and families best injuries to do it not believing. You really lied. I don't think so Sean because he's claiming court was that he got hoodwinked into lying. Neither he nor his lawyers are saying that he told the truth. He was asked. Did you ask the Russians through Kislyak not to escalate? Detentions after the Obama of the Obama sanctions he denied that. He had said that. But he obviously did say because it's on the tape, and he denied that the Russian ambassador had told them that they decided not to escalate. Out of slings request. So he's not saying that he told the truth about those things is position in court is that he didn't tell the truth. What they haven't established is why he was questioned in the first place. It's has seemed to me from the very beginning here that there was no predicate to have an investigation of Flynn. It was nothing wrong with Flynn having had those conversations with Kislyak. It was sup- it for him to lie about them. But there was nothing wrong with having them in the first place. And my sense of what happened here is that they intimidated Flynn into thinking that the Logan act which is more abundant to seventeen ninety nine law. That has been exercised twice not successfully. Yeah. And I think what happened was they made Flynn thinks that he was in real jeopardy if he had had these conversations. And discuss these matters with the Russian ambassador because of the the Logan act, and that Flynn panicked and lied about them. But that doesn't mean they should have been investigating in the first place, and they shouldn't have told him. He shouldn't have a lawyer. I mean that you don't get you don't get to advise somebody like that. They they shouldn't have told them that. But at the same time, you know, he's a he's the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. And he knows you shouldn't lie to FBI agents. I mean, come on. Is there any is there any chance he didn't recollect it? I mean, there's no benefit of the doubt at all here that maybe he didn't have a full recollection shawny could've gone to Toronto where he was that was where he was coming from now. But maybe he didn't have the money to sell his house. You can always say at the end of a false state when somebody gets convicted of false statements that it was a failure recollection. He had the ability to that. I mean, it can't be both. It can't be both that if he if he tells them the truth, he should get credit for that. But if he doesn't tell them the truth, I just I mean. You know, he lied. Crime wave if there's no underlying crime claiming Sean he's not claiming now, I'm asking you though, you're saying that he might have. I believe he lied. I know I understand that. But if there was no underlying crime Edwards, the Logan act wouldn't have been applicable, and there was nothing wrong with him speaking to his future counterpart actually sounds intelligent to me. And then call me is threading the needle doing things he wouldn't do in the Bush Obama administration. Mccain's telling them not to have a lawyer and the ages go win with a strategy that is described in the three zero to make them seem like, they're they're buddies, and blah, blah, blah. It just seems like a setup to me. It's a perjury trap. I completely agree. It's a perjury trap. Right. Greg. Well, there are a lot of reasons somebody pleads to a process crime that I regard as you know, in the scheme of things, it's fairly minor thing, especially if prosecutors have cost you to go broke you've had to sell your home, and they're threatening to prosecute your son on a different matter. So that changes the equation dramatically. But I look at this three oh two and what I see here is that the FBI agents Peter Struck and they blank out the other one we know which GOP enka, which Rosenstein continues to hide question. Mark day say. That they had the impression at the time that the defendant was interview that he was not lying, and and they did not think he was lying now that is the most important part of the fifteen pages of documents that we have we are now seeing it in the three oh two. And so my question would be if I were the judge on Tuesday Emmet Sullivan. I would say why did you prosecute this man for line when the agents who interviewed him determined? He wasn't and I would love to hear the answer to that. So that's what jumps out out at me. The most. Andy you want to respond to that? Yeah. I guess, you know, the only thing that you can say about it on the on the malign front is. Weather. Somebody tells the truth to agents or not. Is not something that hinges on whether the agents correctly predict or judge that the person who they're talking to seems to be. Telling the truth, or at least, they're the only witness. Right. You're leaving out the third witness who's the most important witness, which is the person himself, and if the person himself if I lie to you, Greg, and you think I'm telling you the truth and two months later, I say I went over on Greg. The fact is I pulled over on you, regardless of whether you thought at the time that I was telling them. Lasca serious. I mean is there any chance he decided to plead to a lesser crime of lying, which means he has to say that he lied to get his kid off or to get further. You know, he can't afford the lawyers anymore and all that. I mean, you say anything to take your deal know, anything is possible. But the point is you think he lied. He says he lied and his lawyers are saying he lied, and I it doesn't make any sense to me would take a position in court that I have been pressured by the FBI I've been hoodwinked into the by the FBI. But let me ask you at all. Why wouldn't you? Why wouldn't you just say I didn't lie? Why would you go with? I listen, I agree with I agree with you. But again, I under these circumstances. Are you at all concerned a how this was obtained? Meaning they had the transcript I think it's outrageous how it was obtained. I are you are you concerned the FBI's tactics here, and that means Komi and McCabe, basically throwing all. Normal processes out the window to get to this guy when they would never do it in another administration this way. Correct. I think that they had no basis to interview him. I think if you're interviewing a guy for intelligence purposes, you play the tape for him. And then you ask them what did this mean? What did that mean? And if you're doing it by the book, you call the White House counsel, and you say I want to interview the national security because you're describing is an honest way to handle this, right? Right. But they didn't do it that way. That's why I think it's a perjury trap. Is that what we're gonna do it? But my problem is perjury trap for thirty three year vet five years of combat is is just it doesn't just rubbed me the wrong way. It makes me sick to my stomach. Right. Have a perjury trap. There's usually perjury involved and the argument with the perjury trap. Is that it shouldn't have happened in the first place? Not that the guy didn't commit the full statement. Greg. Well, in the three zero to document, it it talks about how Flynn was unguarded, and he was not sophisticated. Those are exact words from the three oh to document. So it it also in mccabe's memo. That's attachment a. Mccabe it Mitch. He's pushing Flynn not to have a lawyer. You know, he's telling him, you know, if we bring anybody else in the room, we got to go through the department of Justice. And and you know, and that is pushing Flynn to go solo, and they the three oh two makes it clear that they decided ahead of time. Not to tell them about the transcript. So they're studying a map. It's a perjury trap. Is Andy just said, but I I want to respond to one other thing people plead guilty to lesser crimes all the time. Even though they may not have committed those crimes, and I think that's what happened here. And again this three oh to the interviewing FBI agent, they do plead guilty to something. They didn't do a lesser crime. Doesn't mean when they go before the judge? They can't say, well, I'm doing this. I didn't really lie, but I'm doing this. Because this is my plea deal. Lawyers can make the argument that he was set up that they didn't. They pushed him not to have a lawyer. They didn't tell him about the transcript that's all three. Oh to stay right there Andy McCarthy and Greg Jarrett are with us eight hundred nine four one, Sean..

Flynn perjury FBI Greg Jarrett Andy McCarthy Sean Judge Sullivan Kislyak mccabe Gregg Jarrett Hillary Muller Obama Defense Intelligence Agency New York Fox assistant US attorney Toronto Russia