nm

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Given the number of votes it took to get en banc review, you can expect this is going to be kicked back to Sullivan, he will run out the clock and hope for a Biden win, forcing a pardon from Trump. It's truly disgusting what Obama and his ilk did to weaponize the judiciary.

---

I've been batting around whether the govt can file a writ of mandamus to the Supremes. The basis being that Sullivan did not get the DOJ's permission to file request for En Banc review. They may not do it as a review by the Supremes may take longer.

Patentmike said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Given the number of votes it took to get en banc review, you can expect this is going to be kicked back to Sullivan, he will run out the clock and hope for a Biden win, forcing a pardon from Trump. It's truly disgusting what Obama and his ilk did to weaponize the judiciary.

---

I've been batting around whether the govt can file a writ of mandamus to the Supremes. The basis being that Sullivan did not get the DOJ's permission to file request for En Banc review. They may not do it as a review by the Supremes may take longer.

---

I toyed with that idea as well. An emergency petition to stop the rehearing but I doubt SCOTUS would accept it.

aggiehawg said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Given the number of votes it took to get en banc review, you can expect this is going to be kicked back to Sullivan, he will run out the clock and hope for a Biden win, forcing a pardon from Trump. It's truly disgusting what Obama and his ilk did to weaponize the judiciary.

---

I've been batting around whether the govt can file a writ of mandamus to the Supremes. The basis being that Sullivan did not get the DOJ's permission to file request for En Banc review. They may not do it as a review by the Supremes may take longer.

---

I toyed with that idea as well. An emergency petition to stop the rehearing but I doubt SCOTUS would accept it.

---

I could see Souter or Kagan, especially Kagan, siding with the gov't on this one. Ginsburg is unlikely unless she wants to protect liberal defendants in the 5th Circuit down the road.

Patentmike said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Given the number of votes it took to get en banc review, you can expect this is going to be kicked back to Sullivan, he will run out the clock and hope for a Biden win, forcing a pardon from Trump. It's truly disgusting what Obama and his ilk did to weaponize the judiciary.

---

I've been batting around whether the govt can file a writ of mandamus to the Supremes. The basis being that Sullivan did not get the DOJ's permission to file request for En Banc review. They may not do it as a review by the Supremes may take longer.

---

I toyed with that idea as well. An emergency petition to stop the rehearing but I doubt SCOTUS would accept it.

---

I could see Souter or Kagan, especially Kagan, siding with the gov't on this one. Ginsburg is unlikely unless she wants to protect liberal defendants in the 5th Circuit down the road.

---

Do you mean Sotomayer? Souter is retired

Quote:

---

I could see Souter or Kagan, especially Kagan, siding with the gov't on this one. Ginsburg is unlikely unless she wants to protect liberal defendants in the 5th Circuit down the road.

---

LOL. You have the same brain fart I always have. Confuse Breyer for Souter.

Susan Rice on the ticket; here's why. To protect Biden from Spygate/Obamagate over the final 75 days.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/joe-biden-susan-rice

Quote:

---

But there is another possible explanation that is worth considering, since it's at least legally true: Putting Susan Rice on the ticket would protect both Biden and Obama (as well as Rice herself) from the ongoing investigation into the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, the discredited FBI probe of Trump's ties to Russia.
As official reports hinting at the role Obama and Biden may have played in targeting Trump officials were declassified in the spring, Attorney General William Barr said in May that neither were in the sights of John Durham, the U.S. Attorney in charge of the investigation. "I don't expect Mr. Durham's work will lead to a criminal investigation of either man," Barr said. "Our concern over potential criminality is focused on others."

Since Barr's May statement, it has come to light that Obama and Biden were more directly involved in the targeting of incoming Trump officials than was previously publicly known. In late June, FBI notes of January 2017 Oval Office meetings were declassified, showing that both men were not only keeping close watch on the FBI's investigation of Trump's first national security advisor Michael Flynn, but were advising it. A New York Times article from earlier this week promoting Rice's audition obscured the evidence declassified the last several months. It noted that Trump has accused Rice "of having participated in an

Obama administration plot against" Flynn, and added that "no such effort has been documented." Rice herselfpersonally documented a meeting in which she, Obama, and Biden decided Flynn's fate.
Presumably, Barr does not want America to take a step closer to resembling a third world regime on his watch. And so, in order to avoid the appearance of a politicized investigation of senior Democrats in retaliation for what was in fact a politicized investigation of a Republican administration, neither Obama nor Biden are being investigated. But that does not mean that they are shielded if someone wants to save themselves by pointing further up the chain of command. And Rice left a paper trail that implicates herself, Obama, and Biden.

---

Can't the same argument be made for why you'd want to keep her off the ticket?

She's toxic at this point and if she ends up on the ticket they open themselves up to the possibility of an indictment coming her way which would likely sink the ticket entirely.

panduh bear said:

---

Can't the same argument be made for why you'd want to keep her off the ticket?

She's toxic at this point and if she ends up on the ticket they open themselves up to the possibility of an indictment coming her way which would likely sink the ticket entirely.

---

Not really. She's somehow almost as dumb as he is (So there'd be less push to remove him in February if he won). She becomes untouchable with investigations publicly if he picks her.

nortex97 said:

---

panduh bear said:

---

Can't the same argument be made for why you'd want to keep her off the ticket?

She's toxic at this point and if she ends up on the ticket they open themselves up to the possibility of an indictment coming her way which would likely sink the ticket entirely.

---

Not really. She's somehow almost as dumb as he is (So there'd be less push to remove him in February if he won). She becomes untouchable with investigations publicly if he picks her.

---

Maybe by DOJ but the Senate can continue to go after her. And the policy at DOJ is within 60 days of the election. Biden names her next week? Still time to indict her. (Or at least alert her lawyer she's a target for a grand jury proceeding if applicable.)

aggiehawg said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

panduh bear said:

---

Can't the same argument be made for why you'd want to keep her off the ticket?

She's toxic at this point and if she ends up on the ticket they open themselves up to the possibility of an indictment coming her way which would likely sink the ticket entirely.

---

Not really. She's somehow almost as dumb as he is (So there'd be less push to remove him in February if he won). She becomes untouchable with investigations publicly if he picks her.

---

Maybe by DOJ but the Senate can continue to go after her. And the policy at DOJ is within 60 days of the election. Biden names her next week? Still time to indict her. (Or at least alert her lawyer she's a target for a grand jury proceeding if applicable.)

---

LOL, that's like saying there's still time for RBG to convert and support the right to life (well, close, not sure that is even possible in a string theory type of way). There's no evidence or reason to think it's likely. Sure, the senate could go after her, but that's not exactly...likely since they've had something like 6 years to do so and have accomplished...less than my dog has at eliminating my rabbit infestation.

Barr/Durham will publish a report saying how concerning it all is, indict some nobodies, and Strzok/McCabe books will still be published, no one will do anything before the next president/senate is elected.

ttha_aggie_09 said:

---

Flynn must really be a threat to A LOT of people... What the hell does he know that makes him so dangerous to "them"?

---

Flynn has been in the DNI since 2011, and became a thorn in the side of Chicago Jesus in 2014...

He understands the ropes of ODNI, as well as knows where bodies are buried, and which closets have skeletons...

Remember, Obama indicated to Trump that Flynn was not a good choice for anything, except maybe for Dogcatcher in Las Cruces, NM (my humor). Why? Because he didn't want him anywhere NEAR the levers of power over National Intelligence, as he can reveal or refute almost everything the Obama Team did to subvert the Intelligence Process.

And, that is why there was such a concerted effort to take Flynn down...and now, Flynn could, or can, be the most important witness to destroy the veils of secrecy around all of this Obama, Biden, Brennan, Strzok, Comey, et. al, crap...but only if he is exonerated, e.g., all charges dropped.

A pardon helps flynn, but won't aid Trump or Barr in this regard. Too easy to "impeach" any testimony he renders.

He was Director of DIA, not the DNI.
Clapper was DNI from 2010 - 2017.

SeMgCo87 said:

---

ttha_aggie_09 said:

---

Flynn must really be a threat to A LOT of people... What the hell does he know that makes him so dangerous to "them"?

---

Flynn has been in the DNI since 2011, and became a thorn in the side of Chicago Jesus in 2014...

He understands the ropes of ODNI, as well as knows where bodies are buried, and which closets have skeletons...

Remember, Obama indicated to Trump that Flynn was not a good choice for anything, except maybe for Dogcatcher in Las Cruces, NM (my humor). Why? Because he didn't want him anywhere NEAR the levers of power over National Intelligence, as he can reveal or refute almost everything the Obama Team did to subvert the Intelligence Process.

And, that is why there was such a concerted effort to take Flynn down...and now, Flynn could, or can, be the most important witness to destroy the veils of secrecy around all of this Obama, Biden, Brennan, Strzok, Comey, et. al, crap...but only if he is exonerated, e.g., all charges dropped.

A pardon helps flynn, but won't aid Trump or Barr in this regard. Too easy to "impeach" any testimony he renders.

---

Close in many respects but off in others. Flynn's main sin against Jarrett/Obama's orthodoxy of self-worship/hatred-of-America was that he spoke out against Islam (as a political ideology). That's it, no reason to make it more complicated.

Flynn's other concern (as a threat) from team coup witch-hunt was that he wouldn't have tolerated things like the Rosenstein effort to get Trump impeached/thrown out of office. The shenanigans with intelligence and the FBI would have been revealed (as well as Brennan's off the books stuff) way earlier, and all of the redaction secrets we are still dealing with (I note again the 3 scope memo's still partially classified or entirely), wouldn't have happened.

Flynn can't now fix any of that, pardoned or dismissed. The ongoing proceedings are mainly intended to intimidate future opponents/enemies.

EKUAg said:

---

He was Director of DIA, not the DNI.
Clapper was DNI from 2010 - 2017.

---

I agree with you, only the way I wrote / intended it it was he was in the Office..so bad word choice on my part.

how is there no recourse for any of this? it's pure insanity.

It happens.

I haven't read all of the last two pages, but I haven't seen any reference to Fokker. Did we just kick aside settled law, really recent settled law from SCOTUS, and try to make new law? I'm asking because every single frickin' time a questionable decision comes up, I get the "but such and such case was decided in 1512, and it's settled law", so we can't change anything.

To say I'm angry is a severely gross understatement, but I know we do have a few good guys on our side, so I'm hoping it works out.

The one thing I really want but can't have, are the phone records of the seven Dem judges on the appellate court---say the last four months worth.

Fokker was the 2016 DC Circuit Court of Appeals decision authored by the Chief Judge Srinivasan.

The Ginsburg authored SCOTUS opinion that bears on the Flynn case is as follows.

Quote:

---

In an opinion Thursday, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speaking for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, had unusually harsh criticism of a federal appellate panel for a practice that some court experts say the justices often embrace themselves.

Violation of the "party presentation" principlecentral to Thursday's rulingis not often the basis for deciding a high court case. The principle refers to the long-standing feature of the court system that the parties involved in litigation, and not judges, are responsible for raising the legal issues a court must resolve.

That principle rarely appears in a Supreme Court decision, and the ruling was all the more remarkable that its authorGinsburgrebuked a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in accusatory terms that said the court's "transformation" of a case went "well beyond the pale."

Ginsburg's opinion was in the case United States v. Sineneng-Smith. Evelyn Sineneng-Smith, who operated an immigration consulting firm in San Jose, California, was convicted of violating a federal law making it a felony to "encourage or induce an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law."

---

LINK

TRM said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Given the number of votes it took to get en banc review, you can expect this is going to be kicked back to Sullivan, he will run out the clock and hope for a Biden win, forcing a pardon from Trump. It's truly disgusting what Obama and his ilk did to weaponize the judiciary.

---

I've been batting around whether the govt can file a writ of mandamus to the Supremes. The basis being that Sullivan did not get the DOJ's permission to file request for En Banc review. They may not do it as a review by the Supremes may take longer.

---

I toyed with that idea as well. An emergency petition to stop the rehearing but I doubt SCOTUS would accept it.

---

I could see Souter or Kagan, especially Kagan, siding with the gov't on this one. Ginsburg is unlikely unless she wants to protect liberal defendants in the 5th Circuit down the road.

---

Do you mean Sotomayer? Souter is retired

---

No. Sotomayer is not tethered to the Constitution. I don't rely on her for anything

Thought it might be a weird autocorrect

Gracias!

BTW, you appear to have a couple of high powered degrees--undergrad and post.

I'm asking because based on you sig, I suspect you have a decent opinion on the whole Wuhan virus. NOT that I want to hear it on this thread, for another time.

fasthorse05 said:

---

BTW, you appear to have a couple of high powered degrees--undergrad and post.

I'm asking because based on you sig, I suspect you have a decent opinion on the whole Wuhan virus. NOT that I want to hear it on this thread, for another time.

---

Don't get him started.

You are welcome. Even I get confused about which case is which at times. Had to look up the Ginsburg decision name. Knew there was a decision but the name is odd and had to double check before I posted.

My memory is still pretty good but not infallible.

fasthorse05 said:

---

BTW, you appear to have a couple of high powered degrees--undergrad and post.

I'm asking because based on you sig, I suspect you have a decent opinion on the whole Wuhan virus. NOT that I want to hear it on this thread, for another time.

---

My opinions have gotten me called both a Coronabro and a denier. I've mostly stopped posting about it.

barnyard1996 said:

---

fasthorse05 said:

---

BTW, you appear to have a couple of high powered degrees--undergrad and post.

I'm asking because based on you sig, I suspect you have a decent opinion on the whole Wuhan virus. NOT that I want to hear it on this thread, for another time.

---

Don't get him started.

---

Watch it. I know where you live.

Patentmike said:

---

barnyard1996 said:

---

fasthorse05 said:

---

BTW, you appear to have a couple of high powered degrees--undergrad and post.

I'm asking because based on you sig, I suspect you have a decent opinion on the whole Wuhan virus. NOT that I want to hear it on this thread, for another time.

---

Don't get him started.

---

Watch it. I know where you live.

---

Come on over. We are out of Quarantine!

SeMgCo87 said:

---

ttha_aggie_09 said:

---

Flynn must really be a threat to A LOT of people... What the hell does he know that makes him so dangerous to "them"?

---

Flynn has been in the DNI since 2011, and became a thorn in the side of Chicago Jesus in 2014...

He understands the ropes of ODNI, as well as knows where bodies are buried, and which closets have skeletons...

Remember, Obama indicated to Trump that Flynn was not a good choice for anything, except maybe for Dogcatcher in Las Cruces, NM (my humor). Why? Because he didn't want him anywhere NEAR the levers of power over National Intelligence, as he can reveal or refute almost everything the Obama Team did to subvert the Intelligence Process.

And, that is why there was such a concerted effort to take Flynn down...and now, Flynn could, or can, be the most important witness to destroy the veils of secrecy around all of this Obama, Biden, Brennan, Strzok, Comey, et. al, crap...but only if he is exonerated, e.g., all charges dropped.

A pardon helps flynn, but won't aid Trump or Barr in this regard. Too easy to "impeach" any testimony he renders.

---

Flynn is already tainted. Testimony ain't going to cut it. Proof is going to have to be produced.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Flynn is already tainted. Testimony ain't going to cut it. Proof is going to have to be produced.

---

Already has been. Which rock under which have you been hiding?

---

Thanks Hawg, I could not be as eloquent as you...

This guy is a great follow.
Retweeted by Sidney.

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Given the number of votes it took to get en banc review, you can expect this is going to be kicked back to Sullivan, he will run out the clock and hope for a Biden win, forcing a pardon from Trump. It's truly disgusting what Obama and his ilk did to weaponize the judiciary.

---

It appears the Deep State wants to drag this out all the way through the election.

I see only two possible outcomes:

- Biden wins, Trump immediately pardons, game over.

- Trump wins, no more incentive for the Deep State to drag it out, case dismissed.


Is there really a reason at this point for Flynn to remain quiet about anything he wants to say? Is he required to remain quiet? If yes, maybe that's what should be addressed - removing any limits to his free speech, if they exist,

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/07/24/meet_steele_dossiers_primary_subsource_fabulist_russian_at_us_think_tank_whose_boozy_past_the_fbi_ignored_124601.html

Quote:

---

.....

Quote:

---

Igor Danchenko
Business Analyst
Target Labs Inc.
8320 Old Courthouse Rd, Suite 200
Vienna, VA 22182
+1-202-679-5323

---

At the time, Danchenko listed Target Labs, an IT recruiter run by ethnic-Russians, as an employer on his resum. But technically, he was not a paid employee there. Thanks to a highly unusual deal Steele arranged with the company, Danchenko was able to use Target Labs as an employment front.

It turns out that in 2014, when Danchenko first started freelancing regularly for Steele after losing his job at a Washington strategic advisory firm, he set out to get a security clearance to start his own company. But drawing income from a foreign entity like Steele's London-based company, Orbis Business Intelligence, would hurt his chances. He was desperate to find a salaried position with a U.S.-based firm, he told the FBI.

So Steele agreed to help him broker a special "arrangement" with Target Labs, where a Russian friend of Danchenko's worked as an executive, in which the company would bring Danchenko on board as an employee but not put him officially on the payroll. Danchenko would continue working for Steele and getting paid by Orbis with payments funneled through Target Labs. In effect, Target Labs served as the "contract vehicle" through which Danchenko was paid a monthly salary for his work for Orbis, the FBI memo reveals.

Though Danchenko had a desk available to use at Target Labs, he did most of his work for Orbis from home and did not take direction from the firm. Steele continued to give him assignments and direct his travel. Danchenko essentially worked as a ghost employee at Target Labs.

Asked about it, a Target Labs spokesman would only say that Danchenko "does not work with us anymore.".....

---

Article provides a great deal of additional info about Danchenko.