REEEEE: PussyGate, a Collection of Trump Investigations

[BADecker]

Trump is using the law at the best time.


Donald Trump: Barack Obama and Joe Biden Will Be Implicated in Russia Hoax

"There's more to come from what I understand, and they're going to be far greater than what you've seen so far, and what you've seen so far is incredible, especially as it relates to President Obama," Trump said while speaking with Fox & Friends about Obama's role in the Russia "hoax."

"I believe he and Biden…Sleepy Joe was involved in this also, very much, and other people around President Obama were totally involved," Trump said.

Trump reacted to the news after House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) released 57 interview transcripts on Thursday from the committee's probe to see if the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

The documents show that former United States Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates testified that she was surprised when Obama told her in an Oval Office meeting about the call that Trump's campaign adviser, Michael Flynn, had with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Asked in the interview if Trump would directly confront Obama or Biden, the president said he would rather have the truth come out in documents.

[1714714614]

1714714614

[1714714614]

1714714614

[TECSHARE]

"Rosenstein memo tasked Mueller to investigate already-discredited Steele allegations"

https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/rosenstein-asked-mueller-investigate-already-discredited



"John Podesta Admits in Testimony Both DNC and Hillary Campaign Split the Cost for Bogus Trump-Russia Dossier That Launched the Coup"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/now-know-john-podesta-admits-testimony-dnc-hillary-campaign-split-cost-bogus-trump-russia-dossier-launched-coup/


"The Cabal of Liars of Top Obama Officials Need to be Held Accountable"

https://saraacarter.com/sara-carter-the-cabal-of-liars-of-top-obama-officials-need-to-be-held-accountable/



"What is amazing about the 53 transcripts released by ODNI yesterday is how many former Obama officials were forced to admit privately under oath that what they claimed in their TV appearances about “collusion” was nonsense and had no basis in reality."

https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1258756043355676673



"Obama Defense Official Evelyn Farkas Admitted She Lied On MSNBC About Having Evidence Of Collusion"

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/08/obama-defense-official-evelyn-farkas-admitted-she-lied-on-msnbc-about-having-evidence-of-collusion/

[Spendulus]

...
They didn't resurrect anything...

Agree with you about what? No it's not stunning....

The courts have already indicated the law is most likely unconstitutional. No one has ever been convicted...

He did lie to them and he admitted it. It's against the law...

Once again though I'll point out that what the FBI did is not illegal...
...

Viper, thank you for your reply.

I'm going to suggest that people following this fascinatingly insane drama now start regularly checking "the other side."

I knew how you would respond because I did that before you replied.

It's not going to be possible for the pro-(Hillary, Comey, Struk, ... long laundry list of players...) to continue keeping it up in the progressive media pipe organs.

They'll try to create a diversion, wait and see. I guess we'll just sit back and observe it in a thread on the internet entitled "Re: REEEEE: PussyGate, a Collection of Trump Investigations"

Pussygate, a collection of Trump Investigations?

No, wait, it's the REEEEE version. The uncensored version.

[squatz1]

....
I know some are not going to be a big fan of Fox here, but this is the best I could do on a breaking news story - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/drops-doj-case-against-michael-flynn-in-wake-of-internal-memo-release

How exactly, could anyone not be a big fan of Fox?

Fox is reporting now that Obama was in the middle of the plot to take down Trump, by going at those such as Flynn, in the effort to get them to rat on Trump. Obama was in the meetings and regularly briefed on the status of the scheme to bring down Trump.

That's not a jab at Fox in particular, I'm just not a big fan of watching people on TV make a big spectacle of things. Would much rather take a deeper dive and read the news from WSJ, NY Times, etc. I feel like you remove some portions of the sensational side of talking heads in the typical media.

Different strokes for different folks though, nothing wrong with that.

[Spendulus]

....
I know some are not going to be a big fan of Fox here, but this is the best I could do on a breaking news story - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/drops-doj-case-against-michael-flynn-in-wake-of-internal-memo-release

How exactly, could anyone not be a big fan of Fox?

Fox is reporting now that Obama was in the middle of the plot to take down Trump, by going at those such as Flynn, in the effort to get them to rat on Trump. Obama was in the meetings and regularly briefed on the status of the scheme to bring down Trump.

That's not a jab at Fox in particular, I'm just not a big fan of watching people on TV make a big spectacle of things. Would much rather take a deeper dive and read the news from WSJ, NY Times, etc. I feel like you remove some portions of the sensational side of talking heads in the typical media.

Different strokes for different folks though, nothing wrong with that.

I would agree with that. For some odd reasons, even a podcast can convey far more information than the likes of television media. And written pages orders of magnitude more.

[squatz1]

....
I know some are not going to be a big fan of Fox here, but this is the best I could do on a breaking news story - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/drops-doj-case-against-michael-flynn-in-wake-of-internal-memo-release

How exactly, could anyone not be a big fan of Fox?

Fox is reporting now that Obama was in the middle of the plot to take down Trump, by going at those such as Flynn, in the effort to get them to rat on Trump. Obama was in the meetings and regularly briefed on the status of the scheme to bring down Trump.

That's not a jab at Fox in particular, I'm just not a big fan of watching people on TV make a big spectacle of things. Would much rather take a deeper dive and read the news from WSJ, NY Times, etc. I feel like you remove some portions of the sensational side of talking heads in the typical media.

Different strokes for different folks though, nothing wrong with that.

I would agree with that. For some odd reasons, even a podcast can convey far more information than the likes of television media. And written pages orders of magnitude more.

+1 to that. Podcasts / just reading the news always conveys a lot more information then people sitting on TV and yelling stuff at me for hours.

The thing with a Podcast / Article is that it kinda has to do a somewhat good job in delivering the story that was advertised. When you're watching the news I don't have any control over what stories I'm going to see or hear about, but on a Podcast I can just click whatever I want or on an article I can do the same.

Removes a large amount of the bias, but not all of it. Still on you to pick who you're going to spend your time with.

[TECSHARE]

"CrowdStrike Had No Evidence of Russians Stealing Emails From DNC, Declassified Transcript Shows"

https://www.theepochtimes.com/crowdstrike-had-no-evidence-of-russians-stealing-emails-from-dnc-declassified-transcript-shows_3346901.html

[Spendulus]

- Where's the 302?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/byron-yorks-daily-memo-the-big-thing-we-still-dont-know-about-the-michael-flynn-case

The interesting thing here is not, where is the 302 and what's in it.

It's the fact that media is mis framing the entire issue as now "Will Flynn's judge agree to his request."

But the actual, basic facts do matter. The 302 contains them, and it should be coming out shortly.

One document they've spent three years trying to change and hide.

[TECSHARE]

Were did you all go? TwattySqueal? SuchGoon? Nutilduuuh? Suddenly none of you want to debate this farce of an investigation any more! Weird...

[Spendulus]

Were did you all go? TwattySqueal? SuchGoon? Nutilduuuh? Suddenly none of you want to debate this farce of an investigation any more! Weird...

DNI director has unmasked names of Obama officials involved in illegal Flynn "unmasking."

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/12/report-acting-dni-grenell-declassifies-list-of-obama-officials-involved-in-flynn-unmasking/

Yes, the silence is creepy. Likely they know it's over, and have a bit of understanding of what's coming.

There were so many opportunities to put a stop to all this, but they had to double down. And now the timeframe of the mess FULL REVEAL right in the lead up and through the middle of the 2020 elections.

[squatz1]

Update on Michael Flynn -- Federal Judge in his case isn't fully ready to toss the case againt Flynn, as he does have some discretion to prod a bit further on the reasoning. He's asking for input from (legal input) from DOJ, Flynn, other parties to see why exactly this is being done by the DOJ. Not sure what kind of legal discretion he has, but I know he is allowed to ask for input before fully accepting it.

I wouldn't call this breaking news, as some were expecting it to happen as this whole thing came out of left field. But I don't personally think this is going to go anywhere. If anything, he'll just end up getting a pardon from Trump as his base will probably now support that with ease.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-flynn-case-takes-unusual-step-allowing-3rd-party-briefs-n1205811?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

[Spendulus]

Update on Michael Flynn -- Federal Judge in his case isn't fully ready to toss the case againt Flynn, as he does have some discretion to prod a bit further on the reasoning. He's asking for input from (legal input) from DOJ, Flynn, other parties to see why exactly this is being done by the DOJ. Not sure what kind of legal discretion he has, but I know he is allowed to ask for input before fully accepting it.

I wouldn't call this breaking news, as some were expecting it to happen as this whole thing came out of left field. But I don't personally think this is going to go anywhere. If anything, he'll just end up getting a pardon from Trump as his base will probably now support that with ease.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-flynn-case-takes-unusual-step-allowing-3rd-party-briefs-n1205811?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

If the judge does not agree, Flynn can simply appeal the case. All the DOJ has to do to reach the desired outcome is to agree with the defendant's position in their first response.

Flynn wins appeal by summary judgement.

[squatz1]

Update on Michael Flynn -- Federal Judge in his case isn't fully ready to toss the case againt Flynn, as he does have some discretion to prod a bit further on the reasoning. He's asking for input from (legal input) from DOJ, Flynn, other parties to see why exactly this is being done by the DOJ. Not sure what kind of legal discretion he has, but I know he is allowed to ask for input before fully accepting it.

I wouldn't call this breaking news, as some were expecting it to happen as this whole thing came out of left field. But I don't personally think this is going to go anywhere. If anything, he'll just end up getting a pardon from Trump as his base will probably now support that with ease.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-flynn-case-takes-unusual-step-allowing-3rd-party-briefs-n1205811?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

If the judge does not agree, Flynn can simply appeal the case. All the DOJ has to do to reach the desired outcome is to agree with the defendant's position in their first response.

Flynn wins appeal by summary judgement.

Honestly not sure on the legal side of things, you could 100% be right here and I honestly have no idea. Took some basic law classes, but I'm pretty sure most did that as well.

"Judge has asked a retired judge to oppose Justice Dept effort to drop Michael Flynn case and to help to examine if he commited perjury" - Washington Post right now (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/court-asks-retired-judge-to-fight-justice-dept-effort-to-drop-michael-flynn-case-and-examine-if-ex-trump-adviser-committed-perjury/2020/05/13/8c0deb0a-9567-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html)

Seems like the judge wants to know if Flynn committed perjury because he pleaded guilty to a crime and now he is claiming to be innocent.

[Spendulus]

Update on Michael Flynn -- Federal Judge in his case isn't fully ready to toss the case againt Flynn, as he does have some discretion to prod a bit further on the reasoning. He's asking for input from (legal input) from DOJ, Flynn, other parties to see why exactly this is being done by the DOJ. Not sure what kind of legal discretion he has, but I know he is allowed to ask for input before fully accepting it.

I wouldn't call this breaking news, as some were expecting it to happen as this whole thing came out of left field. But I don't personally think this is going to go anywhere. If anything, he'll just end up getting a pardon from Trump as his base will probably now support that with ease.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-flynn-case-takes-unusual-step-allowing-3rd-party-briefs-n1205811?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

If the judge does not agree, Flynn can simply appeal the case. All the DOJ has to do to reach the desired outcome is to agree with the defendant's position in their first response.

Flynn wins appeal by summary judgement.

Honestly not sure on the legal side of things, you could 100% be right here and I honestly have no idea. Took some basic law classes, but I'm pretty sure most did that as well.

"Judge has asked a retired judge to oppose Justice Dept effort to drop Michael Flynn case and to help to examine if he commited perjury" - Washington Post right now (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/court-asks-retired-judge-to-fight-justice-dept-effort-to-drop-michael-flynn-case-and-examine-if-ex-trump-adviser-committed-perjury/2020/05/13/8c0deb0a-9567-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html)

Seems like the judge wants to know if Flynn committed perjury because he pleaded guilty to a crime and now he is claiming to be innocent.

Pretty much true, accepted and standard practice that all plea bargainers commit perjury.

What's interesting is that "perjury" is a charge that can be brought by a judge himself toward someone that was in his courtroom. Not by the DOJ and not by some injured party.

AS FAR AS THE LEGALITY of reversing a plea. There are specific rules and conditions for reversing a plea.

Because it's common knowledge that a plea bargain is the defendant swearing to a lie, reversing a plea bargain must be allowed.

If the Judge Sullivan keeps going down this rat hole, it will be another example of someone trying to entrap Trump, and the attempt boomeranging back on them.

[TECSHARE]

"John Brennan Concealed 'High-Quality' Intelligence That Russia Wanted Hillary Clinton To Win: Report"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/john-brennan-concealed-high-quality-intelligence-russia-wanted-hillary-clinton-win-report



"In Stunning Move, Flynn Judge Appoints Gotti Prosecutor To Argue Against DOJ Dismissal"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/stunning-move-flynn-judge-appoints-gotti-prosecutor-argue-against-doj-dismissal

[Spendulus]

"John Brennan Concealed 'High-Quality' Intelligence That Russia Wanted Hillary Clinton To Win: Report"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/john-brennan-concealed-high-quality-intelligence-russia-wanted-hillary-clinton-win-report



"In Stunning Move, Flynn Judge Appoints Gotti Prosecutor To Argue Against DOJ Dismissal"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/stunning-move-flynn-judge-appoints-gotti-prosecutor-argue-against-doj-dismissal

Sure, all the Hillary/Obama team is going to be in deep horse manure.

But it could be worse. They could have failed to knock off Epstein.

[squatz1]

Update on Michael Flynn -- Federal Judge in his case isn't fully ready to toss the case againt Flynn, as he does have some discretion to prod a bit further on the reasoning. He's asking for input from (legal input) from DOJ, Flynn, other parties to see why exactly this is being done by the DOJ. Not sure what kind of legal discretion he has, but I know he is allowed to ask for input before fully accepting it.

I wouldn't call this breaking news, as some were expecting it to happen as this whole thing came out of left field. But I don't personally think this is going to go anywhere. If anything, he'll just end up getting a pardon from Trump as his base will probably now support that with ease.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-flynn-case-takes-unusual-step-allowing-3rd-party-briefs-n1205811?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

If the judge does not agree, Flynn can simply appeal the case. All the DOJ has to do to reach the desired outcome is to agree with the defendant's position in their first response.

Flynn wins appeal by summary judgement.

Honestly not sure on the legal side of things, you could 100% be right here and I honestly have no idea. Took some basic law classes, but I'm pretty sure most did that as well.

"Judge has asked a retired judge to oppose Justice Dept effort to drop Michael Flynn case and to help to examine if he commited perjury" - Washington Post right now (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/court-asks-retired-judge-to-fight-justice-dept-effort-to-drop-michael-flynn-case-and-examine-if-ex-trump-adviser-committed-perjury/2020/05/13/8c0deb0a-9567-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html)

Seems like the judge wants to know if Flynn committed perjury because he pleaded guilty to a crime and now he is claiming to be innocent.

Pretty much true, accepted and standard practice that all plea bargainers commit perjury.

What's interesting is that "perjury" is a charge that can be brought by a judge himself toward someone that was in his courtroom. Not by the DOJ and not by some injured party.

AS FAR AS THE LEGALITY of reversing a plea. There are specific rules and conditions for reversing a plea.

Because it's common knowledge that a plea bargain is the defendant swearing to a lie, reversing a plea bargain must be allowed.

If the Judge Sullivan keeps going down this rat hole, it will be another example of someone trying to entrap Trump, and the attempt boomeranging back on them.

Yup, seems like the judge wants an independent party to come in and do this instead of making it look like he is biased in some way. Pretty smart decision, and people are most likely going to applaud him for doing so. Makes the most sense given the craziness that this case has already caused

Legality of reversing a plea -- yeah no idea. But yeah, I know that he can reverse on this -- though I did read somewhere that the judge does have a small amount of ability to ask for reasoning for the DOJ to drop his case so abruptly. Not much room for him to intervene here.

[Spendulus]

...
Yup, seems like the judge wants an independent party to come in and do this instead of making it look like he is biased in some way. Pretty smart decision, and people are most likely going to applaud him for doing so. Makes the most sense given the craziness that this case has already caused

Legality of reversing a plea -- yeah no idea. But yeah, I know that he can reverse on this -- though I did read somewhere that the judge does have a small amount of ability to ask for reasoning for the DOJ to drop his case so abruptly. Not much room for him to intervene here.

Actually, it should be obvious that a change in plea fro "Guilty to Not Guilty" does not imply perjury.

The real question should be why the judge accepted a plea he knew was fake in the first place.

[TwitchySeal]

...
Yup, seems like the judge wants an independent party to come in and do this instead of making it look like he is biased in some way. Pretty smart decision, and people are most likely going to applaud him for doing so. Makes the most sense given the craziness that this case has already caused

Legality of reversing a plea -- yeah no idea. But yeah, I know that he can reverse on this -- though I did read somewhere that the judge does have a small amount of ability to ask for reasoning for the DOJ to drop his case so abruptly. Not much room for him to intervene here.

Actually, it should be obvious that a change in plea fro "Guilty to Not Guilty" does not imply perjury.

The real question should be why the judge accepted a plea he knew was fake in the first place.

Dude.  Go back and read the documents I posted.

I'll post them again if you want.  But you have to promise to read them and be willing to discuss what they say.

[TECSHARE]

Dude.  Go back and read the documents I posted.

I'll post them again if you want.  But you have to promise to read them and be willing to discuss what they say.

Hey look who it is! TwattySqueal here to die on this hill. Keep defending these frauds and lies regardless of how many facts come out proving it to be baseless and illegal. It is a good look for you.