Not to be confused with the "more to come on Susan Rice" a week or two away.
That Contreras judge is shady character and it is going to blow up at some point.
While serving in his capacity as a FISA judge he approved a warrant that another judge rejected. Then over in his capacity as a regular judge he was in charge of Flynn's case but suddenly had to recuse- not before the case began but after settlement- but before sentencing. An odd time to recuse, as if somehow some evidence of conflict came up suddenly. As in that whole fisa warrant thing blowing up.
Anyway, not sayin I have figure it all out or anyone else yet. But let's just say that when all the facts are known, it will not be pretty.
There a couple members here who know the implications of some nitty-gritty legal developments, so for them, I share that the judge who replaced Contreras ordered the government to re-confirm to the court that all exculpatory evidence had been turned over to Flynn, and that order came upon the initiative of the Court, not a motion from the defendant/Flynn. Yeh, the new judge saw that the government had already gone down the road of Mueller's old Mueller 101 strategy which was to withhold exculpatory evidence.
It is rotten. Something be very smelly there.
As a minor point, the court's order also specified that the government needed to turn over any evidence that could be relevant for SENTENCING- not just prosecution. My guess is that if legally the judge cannot overturn that plea deal because it is a done deal (although being contested) that the judge may at least use the stinky process as a basis for giving a light sentence. Any good, ethical judge is pissed at the FBI and the FISA court in this stinky process.
http://www.pacificpundit.com/2018/02/02/10-of-11-fisa-court-judges-are-obama-appointees/
That Contreras judge is shady character and it is going to blow up at some point.
While serving in his capacity as a FISA judge he approved a warrant that another judge rejected. Then over in his capacity as a regular judge he was in charge of Flynn's case but suddenly had to recuse- not before the case began but after settlement- but before sentencing. An odd time to recuse, as if somehow some evidence of conflict came up suddenly. As in that whole fisa warrant thing blowing up.
Anyway, not sayin I have figure it all out or anyone else yet. But let's just say that when all the facts are known, it will not be pretty.
There a couple members here who know the implications of some nitty-gritty legal developments, so for them, I share that the judge who replaced Contreras ordered the government to re-confirm to the court that all exculpatory evidence had been turned over to Flynn, and that order came upon the initiative of the Court, not a motion from the defendant/Flynn. Yeh, the new judge saw that the government had already gone down the road of Mueller's old Mueller 101 strategy which was to withhold exculpatory evidence.
It is rotten. Something be very smelly there.
As a minor point, the court's order also specified that the government needed to turn over any evidence that could be relevant for SENTENCING- not just prosecution. My guess is that if legally the judge cannot overturn that plea deal because it is a done deal (although being contested) that the judge may at least use the stinky process as a basis for giving a light sentence. Any good, ethical judge is pissed at the FBI and the FISA court in this stinky process.
http://www.pacificpundit.com/2018/02/02/10-of-11-fisa-court-judges-are-obama-appointees/
Last edited:
