Man Flynn and his lawyers must have fallen down the stairs every day growing up and made sure to hit their head on every step to be trying stuff this absurdly stupid.
+3
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Man Flynn and his lawyers must have fallen down the stairs every day growing up and made sure to hit their head on every step to be trying stuff this absurdly stupid.
His lawyers probably did not have any knowledge the documents had been altered
Or at least that’s what they’ll probably argue to the bar
Man Flynn and his lawyers must have fallen down the stairs every day growing up and made sure to hit their head on every step to be trying stuff this absurdly stupid.
His lawyers probably did not have any knowledge the documents had been altered
Or at least that’s what they’ll probably argue to the bar
At this point, wouldn't an ethical lawyer (or at least one who wasn't complicit, and doesn't want to get tied to this) then drop their client?
I mean, it's one thing for a client to lie to a lawyer. It's another to give that lawyer fabricated evidence to enter into the official record, and falsely claim it's legitimate.
Man Flynn and his lawyers must have fallen down the stairs every day growing up and made sure to hit their head on every step to be trying stuff this absurdly stupid.
His lawyers probably did not have any knowledge the documents had been altered
Or at least that’s what they’ll probably argue to the bar
At this point, wouldn't an ethical lawyer (or at least one who wasn't complicit, and doesn't want to get tied to this) then drop their client?
I mean, it's one thing for a client to lie to a lawyer. It's another to give that lawyer fabricated evidence to enter into the official record, and falsely claim it's legitimate.
That's at least a referral to the state bar association for investigation of the incident, if not sanctions.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
Man Flynn and his lawyers must have fallen down the stairs every day growing up and made sure to hit their head on every step to be trying stuff this absurdly stupid.
His lawyers probably did not have any knowledge the documents had been altered
Or at least that’s what they’ll probably argue to the bar
At this point, wouldn't an ethical lawyer (or at least one who wasn't complicit, and doesn't want to get tied to this) then drop their client?
I mean, it's one thing for a client to lie to a lawyer. It's another to give that lawyer fabricated evidence to enter into the official record, and falsely claim it's legitimate.
Man Flynn and his lawyers must have fallen down the stairs every day growing up and made sure to hit their head on every step to be trying stuff this absurdly stupid.
His lawyers probably did not have any knowledge the documents had been altered
Or at least that’s what they’ll probably argue to the bar
At this point, wouldn't an ethical lawyer (or at least one who wasn't complicit, and doesn't want to get tied to this) then drop their client?
I mean, it's one thing for a client to lie to a lawyer. It's another to give that lawyer fabricated evidence to enter into the official record, and falsely claim it's legitimate.
What if they received that evidence from the DOJ?
Well... fuck. That's a realistic nightmare possibility.
I kind of get the sense that they feel they're protected by the DoJ, and the case is already over anyway, so they're making these wacky, aggressive plays because no one is going to punish them for it. And yeah, it's very likely those new documents came from the DoJ. They recently did a sit down interview with one of the investigators and quickly published summaries of that interview in an obvious attempt to further smear the investigation, so they probably "updated" documents with that new information.
Man Flynn and his lawyers must have fallen down the stairs every day growing up and made sure to hit their head on every step to be trying stuff this absurdly stupid.
His lawyers probably did not have any knowledge the documents had been altered
Or at least that’s what they’ll probably argue to the bar
At this point, wouldn't an ethical lawyer (or at least one who wasn't complicit, and doesn't want to get tied to this) then drop their client?
I mean, it's one thing for a client to lie to a lawyer. It's another to give that lawyer fabricated evidence to enter into the official record, and falsely claim it's legitimate.
What if they received that evidence from the DOJ?
Well... fuck. That's a realistic nightmare possibility.
I hadn’t considered it came anywhere BUT the Barr arm of the DOJ that is both trying to get Flynn off AND ruin Strzok’s life
So, what about all the states that have two party consent wiretap laws? That appears to be California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.
Only the most stupid people would get in trouble there.
Hmm... after the Woodward interviews, that means Trump is still at risk.
BREAKING: DOJ JUST HELD THAT THEY CAN'T PROSECUTE PEOPLE W/O A RECORDING OF THEIR LIES.
That sound you just heard was a million appeals lawyers quoting Flynn's dumbfuck hack lawyers.
The context here is important to understand just how stupid of an argument this is.
This was about the FBI interview of Flynn and the fact that the FBI tossed their recording into the bit recyclers after they produced the transcript that was then verified, signed by Flynn and lawyer, and registered with the court.
That makes this the prosecution attempting to run back the confession to the crimes after having already proved that there were crimes for the defense.
I hope the judge survives the simulaneous aynerism and stroke in order to throw the book at everyone involved in this. Including but especially Barr.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
Former federal judge John Gleeson, appointed as amicus in Flynn case, says, "I can't believe some of the things I'm hearing." He says Flynn pleaded guilty twice then checked the which way the winds blew. "Not for nothing, but this crime was committed in the West Wing," he says.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
This feels like an appeal to like CSI level jury nullification "well if they had so much why don't they have this additional unnecessary thing" but like directed at a judge who would seemingly know why.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I know some of you have already pointed it out, but it's kind of insane to me that they're trying to buffalo the amicus judge with this "Lionel Hutz surprise witness" level of trash. This is the guy you need to win over so that it never gets back to Sullivan.
Need we forget he was hospitilized following beating his wife and threatening to kill her. So much of the press is giving him a pass on being a suspected domestic abuser.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Need we forget he was hospitilized following beating his wife and threatening to kill her. So much of the press is giving him a pass on being a suspected domestic abuser.
Even worse, I saw some right-wing pundit (sorry, don't remember who) being outraged at how roughly the police treated him. I may have audibly screamed when I heard that.
Need we forget he was hospitilized following beating his wife and threatening to kill her. So much of the press is giving him a pass on being a suspected domestic abuser.
Even worse, I saw some right-wing pundit (sorry, don't remember who) being outraged at how roughly the police treated him. I may have audibly screamed when I heard that.
Yeah I heard some hand wringing about him being taken down like he was. If only he'd complied as they say.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I know some of you have already pointed it out, but it's kind of insane to me that they're trying to buffalo the amicus judge with this "Lionel Hutz surprise witness" level of trash. This is the guy you need to win over so that it never gets back to Sullivan.
I know some of you have already pointed it out, but it's kind of insane to me that they're trying to buffalo the amicus judge with this "Lionel Hutz surprise witness" level of trash. This is the guy you need to win over so that it never gets back to Sullivan.
I know some of you have already pointed it out, but it's kind of insane to me that they're trying to buffalo the amicus judge with this "Lionel Hutz surprise witness" level of trash. This is the guy you need to win over so that it never gets back to Sullivan.
This isn’t just Flynn’s lawyers
It’s the DOJ
“We don’t have evidence to prosecute this crime because we intentionally destroyed it” sure is an argument.
I know some of you have already pointed it out, but it's kind of insane to me that they're trying to buffalo the amicus judge with this "Lionel Hutz surprise witness" level of trash. This is the guy you need to win over so that it never gets back to Sullivan.
This isn’t just Flynn’s lawyers
It’s the DOJ
What's the difference?
DoJ statements and decisions carry a lot of weight. If suddenly their official position is "Evidence only counts in its original form, even if the accused confesses to the charge and signs the transcript" then that opens a massive can of legal worms.
I know some of you have already pointed it out, but it's kind of insane to me that they're trying to buffalo the amicus judge with this "Lionel Hutz surprise witness" level of trash. This is the guy you need to win over so that it never gets back to Sullivan.
This isn’t just Flynn’s lawyers
It’s the DOJ
What's the difference?
DoJ statements and decisions carry a lot of weight. If suddenly their official position is "Evidence only counts in its original form, even if the accused confesses to the charge and signs the transcript" then that opens a massive can of legal worms.
Lawyers can argue an stupid shit they want, it has no bearing on what the law actually says about the validity of evidence. It's just normally the defense lawyer doing it and not the prosecution trying to actively sabotage their own case.
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
I know some of you have already pointed it out, but it's kind of insane to me that they're trying to buffalo the amicus judge with this "Lionel Hutz surprise witness" level of trash. This is the guy you need to win over so that it never gets back to Sullivan.
This isn’t just Flynn’s lawyers
It’s the DOJ
What's the difference?
DoJ statements and decisions carry a lot of weight. If suddenly their official position is "Evidence only counts in its original form, even if the accused confesses to the charge and signs the transcript" then that opens a massive can of legal worms.
well, I think everyone knows that everything this DOJ does is going to have an asterisk next to it that's visible from space.
Posts
His lawyers probably did not have any knowledge the documents had been altered
Or at least that’s what they’ll probably argue to the bar
At this point, wouldn't an ethical lawyer (or at least one who wasn't complicit, and doesn't want to get tied to this) then drop their client?
I mean, it's one thing for a client to lie to a lawyer. It's another to give that lawyer fabricated evidence to enter into the official record, and falsely claim it's legitimate.
That's at least a referral to the state bar association for investigation of the incident, if not sanctions.
What if they received that evidence from the DOJ?
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Well... fuck. That's a realistic nightmare possibility.
I hadn’t considered it came anywhere BUT the Barr arm of the DOJ that is both trying to get Flynn off AND ruin Strzok’s life
That sound you just heard was a million appeals lawyers quoting Flynn's dumbfuck hack lawyers.
Only the most stupid people would get in trouble there.
Hmm... after the Woodward interviews, that means Trump is still at risk.
The context here is important to understand just how stupid of an argument this is.
This was about the FBI interview of Flynn and the fact that the FBI tossed their recording into the bit recyclers after they produced the transcript that was then verified, signed by Flynn and lawyer, and registered with the court.
That makes this the prosecution attempting to run back the confession to the crimes after having already proved that there were crimes for the defense.
I hope the judge survives the simulaneous aynerism and stroke in order to throw the book at everyone involved in this. Including but especially Barr.
NPR Reporter.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It was signed and vetted by both the confessor and his lawyer?!
Because now, they don't want it to be?
That appears to be what's happening.
Originally as comedy, now as farce.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Grifters gotta grift.
Only the best people.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Even worse, I saw some right-wing pundit (sorry, don't remember who) being outraged at how roughly the police treated him. I may have audibly screamed when I heard that.
Yeah I heard some hand wringing about him being taken down like he was. If only he'd complied as they say.
pleasepaypreacher.net
This was an account that did not like defund the police stuff
This isn’t just Flynn’s lawyers
It’s the DOJ
What's the difference?
“We don’t have evidence to prosecute this crime because we intentionally destroyed it” sure is an argument.
DoJ statements and decisions carry a lot of weight. If suddenly their official position is "Evidence only counts in its original form, even if the accused confesses to the charge and signs the transcript" then that opens a massive can of legal worms.
Lawyers can argue an stupid shit they want, it has no bearing on what the law actually says about the validity of evidence. It's just normally the defense lawyer doing it and not the prosecution trying to actively sabotage their own case.
well, I think everyone knows that everything this DOJ does is going to have an asterisk next to it that's visible from space.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
If it's visible from space, it could be an asteroid.