Mueller wants to be sure Flynn canât try to back out of his promises to incriminate tRump in such manner that Hair Furor canât escape conviction for high crimes and misdemeanors.
This is the same judge who went off on a rant with his opinions about federal prosecutors, when he should have just decided the issues before him. This is worrisome to me. I can see him stirring up trouble with the plea deal and feeding the conspiracy theories.
Youâre thinking of Judge T.S. Ellis. Different judge.
Attorneys, help me out here. If heâs cooperating with Mueller, that means he will testify to the grand jury, wonât he? In which case he canât be sentenced before he testifies. That would make no sense at all.
I suspect after three postponements the Judge simply wants to keep things moving along.
Yep. After three delays, youâve got to expect a federal judge to ask you to explain the situation, even with an agreed joint motion.
OT but theyâre STILL using Nunesâ debunked memo claiming that the Court was not informed of the dossierâs source in order to scrounge up their conspiracy theoriesâŚand they mention NOTHING about the follow up memo that completely debunked it:
Yep. Regardless of the agreement, the judge has to make sure nothing is going on that prejudices either side, including the publicâs interest in the speedy resolution of criminal matters and punishment of criminals, but also particularly the defendantâs due process rights, because in a situation like this, the prosecution team is in the power position and could easily be punching downwards. I donât think thatâs the case here, but the judge is right to ask them to explain the delays.
Oh please dear God i promise to believe in you if only you will lock him up.
Oh yes, Please send me a sign that you exist.
No it isnât. The ranty judge was T.S. Ellis of the Eastern District of Virginia:
This is Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the D.C. District.
Oh god save us all from the prickliness of long-service federal judges.
Special counsel Robert Mueller will have to explain his request to defer sentencing former national security advisor-turned-cooperating government witness Michael Flynn at a hearing next week.
âYou Honor, even with 12 lawyers working with Mr. Flynn 30 hours per week we havenât finished digging to the end of the swamp. Weâd like to keep Mr. Flynnâs shovel in his hand until it really is drained.â
This is starting to feel like a disturbing trend. Judges becoming more and more hostile to Muellerâs investigation, even where prosecutors are following standard protocol for active investigations and cooperating witnesses. Would love to know whatâs causing this.
OT, but holy fucking hell weâre headed for another fascism induced attempt at genocideâŚI just canât see it any other wayâŚ
Just wait until Trump hears about this and ALEC sends the template legislation to the GOPâŚ
This article on DOJ, FBI, SEC, FTC going after Facebook will turn out to be a big deal imho.
A federal investigation into Facebookâs sharing of data with political consultancy Cambridge Analytica has broadened to focus on the actions and statements of the tech giant and involves three agencies, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, according to people familiar with the official inquiries.
Representatives for the FBI, the SEC and the Federal Trade Commission have joined the Justice Department in its inquiries about the two companies and the sharing of personal information of 71 million Americans, suggesting the wide-ranging nature of the investigation, said five people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a probe that remains incomplete.
These people added that the emphasis has been on what Facebook has reported publicly about its sharing of information with Cambridge Analytica, whether those representations square with the underlying facts and whether Facebook made sufficiently complete and timely disclosures to the public and investors about the matter. The Capitol Hill testimony of Facebook officials, including chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, also is being scrutinized as part of the probe, said people familiar with the federal inquiries.
This suggests to me a few things:
- Facebook/Zuckerberg have been lying to investigators as to what they shared.
- This article takes the FB scandal much further. Rather than just being a passive conduit for rogue app developers (like that Russian dude who captured FB profile data and handed it to Cambridge Analytica), the Feds are looking at FBâs knowing, active participation in handing over profile data to Cambridge Analytica. In other words, they were actively helping Cambridge Analytica to build the database that was then weaponized to target US voters.
- Did Facebook or Cambridge Analytica hand over user data to the Russians? Some FB ads were paid for in rubles. That suggests that FB did know what the Russians were doing on their site. Rather than a passive platform, it seems that they were an active agent of the campaign to elect Donald Trump.
This would suggest privacy violations and violations of campaign finance and election laws. The Feds appear to be hot on the trail of FB.
I donât see this Judgeâs request for a hearing to be too concerning. I do think the Judge wants to make sure that the parties are not âpulling a fast oneâ on him and not letting him know whatâs going on. Flynnâs and Muellerâs teams appear to be cooperating. Perhaps Mueller has offered less jail time with more cooperation. Weâll see.
I wonder if they might try the âsoldier of fortuneâ defense? âOur services were for hire. They were willing to pay and we didnât ask why.â Iâm sure thatâs never failed in the past.
Understanding what the prosecutors are doing here depends somewhat on the normal procedure that they seem to be trying to avoid. Usually federal judges accept the guilty plea at the plea hearing but defer acceptance of the plea agreement until they have a presentence report in hand. That report is prepared by a probation officer who works for the judge (or at least for the judiciary) rather than the prosecutor. The acceptance of the plea agreement is usually deferred to the sentencing hearing where, if the agreement is rejected, the defendant is given a chance to withdraw from the plea.
In the normal cooperation case, the process would run until the judge has the presentence report and the time for sentencing is approaching. Then the prosecutor would ask for a continuance so the defendant can complete his cooperation (usually testimony) and the presentence report can be updated to reflect that. This keeps the Sword of Damocles over the defendantâs head while he is on the stand.
Perhaps the prosecutors here are afraid that the judge will reject the plea agreement as soon as he gets the presentence report. Otherwise, there would seem no reason to deviate from the normal process. Of course, the prosecutors would still fight tooth and nail for continuances to keep the defendant firmly in their pocket, and judgeâs routinely grant these.