Thanks, my Latin is non-existent.

Zemira said:

---

Thanks, my Latin is non-existent.

---

Funny thing is I started studying Latin in 9th grade, well before I ever thought about being a lawyer. Had a total of three years in Latin in high school. It's a really easy language to learn and helps with learning most Romance languages as the structure is much the same, just need to memorize the vocabulary and plug into the structure.

It did help having the Latin background when I finally did go to law school though. Although when I was actually practicing and dictating documents and briefs for my secretary to transcribe, the written guesses of the translations from her were comical.

"stare decisis" became starry nights for instance. I quickly learned to spell those terms out for her.

Looks like it was probably warrant #3 & #4.

seems to my quick review that all convictions / prosecutions by miller are / will be thrown out flat on their ass.

I wish they'd throw Mueller out on his skinny Marine ass, along with any convictions!

Short McCabe thread.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/24/grassley-letter-asks-whether-taxpayers-paid-russian-agent-to-help-start-the-collusion-hoax/

The above is Professor Cleveland's analysis of Grassley's letter to Baker querying Halper's contracts. She brings up the connection between Halper & Dearlove. I am not aware of any direct references linking Halper with Steele, but Halper & Dearlove ran the Cambridge intel seminars which Trubnikov attended/spoke, & this would provide a link to Steele -- remember, Dearlove was Steele's former boss & mentor; Steele consulted Dearlove about his Dossier & Dearlove publicly supported it. Dearlove also brings into play Hakluyt, the vast private intel company, which could be a source for rumors from alleged Russian sources -- Halper was involved with Hakluyt as well. Read:
https://larouchepac.com/20190112/part-iii-british-intelligence-fraud-creates-coup-against-donald-trump

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Who's going to prison? That's all that will stop this bull*****

---

Rosey testified that there would be serious consequences for doing something like this. I guess we'll see about that.

Aggiebrewer said:

---

I'll need you to conjugate

---

That's nothing. You should hear me recite the declinations. I actually learned more English grammar by studying Latin than I did in English grammar classes.

drcrinum said:

---

---

If you read the case that Sullivan cites, it's a harbinger if what's going to happen to Flynn.

United States vs Cray:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1038965.html

Well, the fact that the Prosecution threatened to go after Flynn's son, doesn't that satisfy the Rule 11 argument?

drcrinum said:

---

United States vs Cray:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1038965.html

Well, the fact that the Prosecution threatened to go after Flynn's son, doesn't that satisfy the Rule 11 argument?

---

Comey testified to a congressional committee that the agents felt he didn't lie. That should meet the standard. I like this case for Flynn.

drcrinum said:

---

United States vs Cray:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1038965.html

Well, the fact that the Prosecution threatened to go after Flynn's son, doesn't that satisfy the Rule 11 argument?

---

No, it doesn't.

VegasAg86 said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

United States vs Cray:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1038965.html

Well, the fact that the Prosecution threatened to go after Flynn's son, doesn't that satisfy the Rule 11 argument?

---

Comey testified to a congressional committee that the agents felt he didn't lie. That should meet the standard. I like this case for Flynn.

---

As opposed to Flynn admitting his guilt and then affirming it later?

HTownAg98 said:

---

VegasAg86 said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

United States vs Cray:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1038965.html

Well, the fact that the Prosecution threatened to go after Flynn's son, doesn't that satisfy the Rule 11 argument?

---

Comey testified to a congressional committee that the agents felt he didn't lie. That should meet the standard. I like this case for Flynn.

---

As opposed to Flynn admitting his guilt and then affirming it later?

---

We're talking about withdrawing a guilty plea, of course he has plead guilty. That is why there is a pretty high standard for withdrawal. "(M)ust affirmatively advance an objectively reasonable argument he is innocent" isn't easy to meet. However, Flynn's position is he is in fact innocent, so I assume they believe they can meet the standard. Will the judge agree? We'll see, but the standard is in line with Flynn's position.

More from Gigi.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1220901967091859456.html

Why do I get the feeling that forcing Flynn to testify in order to withdraw his guilty plea is setup to either get him to incriminate himself, or a perjury trap.

Rapier108 said:

---

Why do I get the feeling that forcing Flynn to testify in order to withdraw his guilty plea is setup to either get him to incriminate himself, or a perjury trap.

---

The judge didn't require the prosecution to turn over Brady material because it wasn't relevant because of the guilty plea. This hearing would make that evidence relevant. It could be a very good thing for Flynn. The judge isn't likely to be trying to set a perjury trap

Rapier108 said:

---

Why do I get the feeling that forcing Flynn to testify in order to withdraw his guilty plea is setup to either get him to incriminate himself, or a perjury trap.

---

Healthy skepticism is why. The justice system seems to be 70% fraud or more where this dossier unearthing the facts trail is concerned. Barr and Durham supposedly will have really strong stuff in May, but we have heard that before. The incredible static generated successfully by the Democrats even with this self-evident fraud impeachment is another example. That HRC could even have the option of getting involved in a brokered convention is another clue of bogus two-tier justice.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1220952343098937350.html

Fascinating bit of sleuthing again by Sundance. As it is becoming clear, the FBI/DOJ knew the Steele Dossier was bogus in mid January 2017 when the Primary Sub-source was questioned; that's why the 2nd & 3rd Page FISA application renewals have been declared invalid. Well, would you believe that Rosenstein in August 2017 -- 6 months later -- sent a scope memo to Mueller authorizing him to investigate entities only alleged in the Dossier? Even though that scope memo is redacted, the Mueller report indicates this is what actually happened.
Rosenstein is a snake, no question about it.

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1220952343098937350.html

Fascinating bit of sleuthing again by Sundance. As it is becoming clear, the FBI/DOJ knew the Steele Dossier was bogus in mid January 2017 when the Primary Sub-source was questioned; that's why the 2nd & 3rd Page FISA application renewals have been declared invalid. Well, would you believe that Rosenstein in August 2017 -- 6 months later -- sent a scope memo to Mueller authorizing him to investigate entities only alleged in the Dossier? Even though that scope memo is redacted, the Mueller report indicates this is what actually happened.
Rosenstein is a snake, no question about it.

---

It would be hilarious if it all went away because of fruit of the poisonous tree.

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1220952343098937350.html

Fascinating bit of sleuthing again by Sundance. As it is becoming clear, the FBI/DOJ knew the Steele Dossier was bogus in mid January 2017 when the Primary Sub-source was questioned; that's why the 2nd & 3rd Page FISA application renewals have been declared invalid. Well, would you believe that Rosenstein in August 2017 -- 6 months later -- sent a scope memo to Mueller authorizing him to investigate entities only alleged in the Dossier? Even though that scope memo is redacted, the Mueller report indicates this is what actually happened.
Rosenstein is a snake, no question about it.

---

What is the relevance of this?

And I posted earlier on this page that it may be the 3rd and 4th FISA. But Jeff Carlson may be wrong, I don't know.

The 2nd & 3rd renewals would be the 3rd & 4th FISAs.

Oooo la la...DOJ is late with their homework and asking for more time.

FISC doesn't seem to happy about...

I thought that malicious prosecutorial practices were just something that you saw in the movies. After this thread, I'm wondering if we need to take a look at the entire justice system.

Nice recap of Ciaramella, Misko and Vindman in the way they cooked up a political hit on Trump. https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/01/22/whistleblower_was_overheard_in_17_discussing_with_ally_how_to_remove_trump_121701.html

will25u said:

---

What is the relevance of this?

And I posted earlier on this page that it may be the 3rd and 4th FISA. But Jeff Carlson may be wrong, I don't know

---

The relevance of that is Rosey used the dossier to expand Mueller's scope months after he knew Steele's sub-source had said he made his stuff up. The prosecution on Mansfort was covered in that expanded scope. That puts the prosecution of Mansfort in question.

The documents appointing Mueller need to be declassified.

So what we are getting at is much of the stuff that has been found and prosecuted could have come from illegally gotten FISA warrants and fruit of the poisonous tree and all that. So will they throw out any convictions and dismiss pending cases? Everyone has treated this whole investigation charade cold-coup as ass-backwards as possible. I don't have much hope of them undoing any of the **** they pulled off to date.

Quote:

---

The relevance of that is Rosey used the dossier to expand Mueller's scope months after he knew Steele's sub-source had said he made his stuff up. The prosecution on Mansfort was covered in that expanded scope. That puts the prosecution of Mansfort in question.

The documents appointing Mueller need to be declassified.

---

I recall having some heated discussions over the Manafort search warrants. I'm not sure this new information would work to nullify those as the EDVa had done the investigation before but dropped the case after Yanukovych was deposed in 2014.

But it might be worth another look by Manafort's lawyers.

aggiehawg said:

---

But it might be worth another look by Manafort's lawyers.

---

I wonder how much of the scope memos they got to see? It's absolutely worth looking into and fighting to see anything that was redacted before.

VegasAg86 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

But it might be worth another look by Manafort's lawyers.

---

I wonder how much of the scope memos they got to see? It's absolutely worth looking into and fighting to see anything that was redacted before.

---

One other thing. This whole mess should go into Manafort's file for a pardon or commutation of sentence. A smarmy and sleazy as he was, he was only prosecuted because they wanted him to compose against Trump. He was hosed.