Dear KAG: 20200512 Open Thread

This week, something a little different from the modern composer John Rutter. Honestly, his passion is centuries old a cappella polyphony, but his music compositions are popular. This one grows on you even if the swords into ploughshares sentiment is one that needs to be balanced by reality. The text is under the video.

I see a distant land: it shines so clear. Sometimes it seems so far, sometimes so near. Come, join together, take the dusty road; Help one another: share the heavy load. The journey may be long: no end in sight: There may be hills to climb, or giants to fight: But if you’ll take my hand, We’ll walk together toward the land of freedom, freedom, freedom.

I hear a distant song: it fills the air. I hear it, deep and strong, rise up in prayer: ‘O Lord, we are many; help us to be one. Heal our divisions: let thy will be done.’ I know the time will come when war must cease: A time of truth and love, a time of peace. The people cry, ‘How long? Till all our world can join the song of freedom, freedom.

I touch a distant hand and feel its glow, The hand I hoped was there: at last I know. Swords into ploughshares: can it all be true? Friends out of strangers: start with me and you. I see another time, another place Where we can all be one, one human race. The walls will melt away, We’ll come together on the day of freedom, freedom, freedom.

And now for the nitty gritty of the Q Tree 5 minute, stand up, Tuesday morning meeting version of the Daily Thread.

Ahem.

Guidelines for posting and discussion on this site were outlined by our host, WolfM00n. Please, review them from time to time.

The discourse on this site is to be CIVIL – no name calling, baiting, or threatening others here is allowed. Those who are so inclined may visit Wolf’s other sanctuary, the U-Tree, to slog it out.

This site is a celebration of the natural rights endowed to humans by our Creator as well as those enshrined in the Bill of Rights adopted in the founding documents of the United States of America. Within the limits of law, how we exercise these rights is part of the freedom of our discussion.

Fellow tree dweller Wheatie gave us some good reminders on the basics of civility in political discourse:

  1. No food fights.
  2. No running with scissors.
  3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.

__________________________________________________

This is not from today’s readings (we’re in the middle of the recitation of Acts of the Apostles), but where my Bible opened on Monday when I picked a random spot.

Isaiah, Chapter 27

In that day the Lord with his hard, and great, and strong sword shall visit leviathan the bar serpent, and leviathan the crooked serpent, and shall slay the whale that is in the sea. [2] In that day there shall be singing to the vineyard of pure wine. [3] I am the Lord that keep it, I will suddenly give it drink: lest any hurt come to it, I keep it night and day. [4] There is no indignation in me: who shall make me a thorn and a brier in battle: shall march against it, shall I set it on fire together? [5] Or rather shall it take hold of my strength, shall it make peace with me, shall it make peace with me?

[6] When they shall rush in unto Jacob, Israel shall blossom and bud, and they shall fill the face of the world with seed. [7] Hath he struck him according to the stroke of him that struck him? or is he slain, as he killed them that were slain by him? [8] In measure against measure, when it shall be cast off, thou shalt judge it. He hath meditated with his severe spirit in the day of heat. [9] Therefore upon this shall the iniquity of the house of Jacob be forgiven: and this is all the fruit, that the sin thereof should be taken away, when he shall have made all the stones of the altar, as burnt stones broken in pieces, the groves and temples shall not stand. [10] For the strong city shall be desolate, the beautiful city shall be forsaken, and shall be left as a wilderness: there the calf shall feed, and there shall he lie down, and shall consume its branches.

[11] Its harvest shall be destroyed with drought, women shall come and teach it: for it is not a wise people, therefore he that made it, shall not have mercy on it: and he that formed it, shall not spare it. [12] And it shall come to pass, that in that day the Lord will strike from the channel of the river even to the torrent of Egypt, and you shall be gathered together one by one, O ye children of Israel. [13] And it shall come to pass, that in that day a noise shall be made with a great trumpet, and they that were lost, shall come from the land of the Assyrians, and they that were outcasts in the land of Egypt, and they shall adore the Lord in the holy mount in Jerusalem.

As always, prayers for the fight against that which seeks to enslave us are welcome. Via con Dios.

821 thoughts on “Dear KAG: 20200512 Open Thread

        1. PWNED by the other side.

          As I pointed out, he could theoretically refuse to dismiss the case, hold another sentencing hearing (even if DOJ doesn’t show up), listen to the defense arguments for a light sentence–and then hit Flynn with whatever the maximum is.

          He’d get reversed on appeal–months or even years from now. And might eventually get impeached when we have a House not full of dickheads.

          Liked by 3 people

    1. “THIS is how monumentally key Flynn’s case is to

      TSAR BOMBA”

      That’s the whole issue in a nutshell. It’s all about the O.

      Liked by 6 people

    1. I didn’t see 4224 above. Here you go:

      4224
      Link to New Q Drop
      Q
      !!Hs1Jq13jV6
      12 May 2020 – 6:46:57 PM
      Anonymous
      12 May 2020 – 6:23:13 PM

      Cue all the Lawfare hacks working on their briefs as we speak.

      >>9145804
      https://news.yahoo.com/obama-irule-of-law-michael-flynn-case-014121045.html
      Did you listen carefully?
      Subject: Flynn
      Topic: Rule of Law @ Risk
      Can you prosecute without prosecutors?
      No.
      Can you ‘extend’ in the public arena to push a coordinated narrative?
      The swamp runs deep.
      Q

      Liked by 9 people

      1. Read this Steve………..

        Judges can’t be prosecutors and “you can’t prosecute without prosecutors”

        then read Sullivan’s Minute Order…

        Liked by 5 people

        1. So I just read this thing again, and I have a different take now that I’ve calmed down. I’m not in any way a “legalese” person, but it sounds like SOMEBODY has requested to file amicus, and the judge is saying he MAY NOT accept it (emphasis added):

          “….the Court anticipates that individuals and organizations will seek leave….when the amicus has an interest in some other case that may be affected by the decision in the present case…or when the amicus has unique information or perspective that can help the Court…Otherwise, leave to file an amicus curiae brief should be denied….a criminal procedure is not a free for all…Accordingly, at the appropriate time, the Court will enter a Scheduling Order governing the submission of any amicus curiae briefs.”

          This looks like he hasn’t said he will ALLOW amicus briefs to be filed. Is anybody here a lawyer, or better yet, a judge?

          Liked by 2 people

          1. read my posts, as well as FG&C…

            Techno believes that amicus was already filed (201) is missing from Judge’s Minute Order…

            Also Judge Berman has taken similar action in Roger Stone case… lots of comments in threads I posted, most of which are coming from lawyers… judges are used-to-be lawyers.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Sidney Powell has filed this:

              It reads:

              “The proposed amicus brief has no place in this court.”

              Someone has filed one. The judge has to address that, correct? I just don’t read what Sullivan wrote as an invitation for more. It reads more like a threat not to allow them.

              Apparently, almost anybody who can demonstrate an interest in the case can file amicus, even for marketing their brand:

              “An amicus brief is a great marketing tool when utilized properly (and after filing). It shows you taking tangible action on an issue important to your customers, suppliers, members, donors, and even competitors. Amicus briefs can be written with fewer case citations and intricate legal discussion, so they are often more accessible to a non-lawyer audience. Entities that file amicus briefs in high-profile cases sometimes receive positive press coverage. Consider tapping into your marketing budget for an amicus brief.”

              https://www.businessjustice.com/should-i-file-an-amicus-curiae-brief.html

              MARKETING? SERIOUSLY?

              I think people freaked out because Sullivan quoted Amy Berman Jackson. But the quote from her is more discouraging than encouraging of amicus briefs, no matter what she actually did.

              I guess I will just have to wait and see.

              Liked by 1 person

  1. National Hurricane Center issues first advisory of season; system off Florida has 50% chance of development

    Posted on May 12, 2020

    https://freedomminds.com/2020/05/12/national-hurricane-center-issues-first-advisory-of-season-system-off-florida-has-50-chance-of-development/

    LATEST REPORT FROM OUR OWN METEOROLOGICAL SPECIALIST, KAT, RIGHT AT THE MIDDLE OF THE HURRICANE STARTING LINE.

    AAAAND, THEYRE OFF!! JUMPING THE GUN…..

    BY A FEW WEEKS, AT LEAST. NEVER LET THE POPULACE CATCH THEIR BREATH…OH NO….

    Liked by 6 people

              1. HAARP is only one weapon in their arsenal – there are portable laser beams – and airborne units attached to planes – not to mention their chemical arsenal – they weaponize just about everything – now it is viruses – gonna take my portable HAARP machine and wipe out all of those nasty people, PR – maybe, Pat will come for a ride with me – she likes my Cessna – lol

                Liked by 4 people

            1. The point being, if they had that kind of control, then why dick around with hurricanes? Small potatoes.

              Therefore, I think it’s a myth. And one hurricane making a right hook isn’t enough to convince me otherwise.

              Weather does weird things from time to time, just as a matter of course.

              Liked by 3 people

              1. Hurricanes give rise to tornadoes and all sorts of weather patterns that spread from their point of origin – to areas north and west – weather can get crazier when geo-engineered – what above that one that hovered in the Caribbean? I just do not think it is all God’s fault – nor by some freak of nature.

                Liked by 2 people

              2. Yep. The amount of energy needed to divert a hurricane is beyond anything we have, even when one looks at a weather system as a special case of a transistor or “valve”, with the external mediating energy being applied much as the base, gate, or grid would act (I forget what they were called in fluidics, which Popular Mechanics espoused so many years ago…).

                EMP damage would be more effective (in a negative sense), easier to do, but VERY obvious, and an obvious act of war, although with the DEMONicRATS “talents” at false flags and obfuscation, it could become a whodunnit quite quickly…

                Liked by 2 people

              3. Even in the case of your transistor analogy, it would have to be done so far in advance it would be difficult to control the result precisely, because weather is fundamentally “chaotic.” Small affects have totally unexpected effects.

                Liked by 1 person

              4. I did see it as a response to me, but of course displaying responses deeper than level 7 all alike would obscure that. (I think WP properly trees everything internally and just displays a limited number of levels…because the notifier keeps working no longer how many back and forths there are.)

                Liked by 2 people

        1. …will be casual about a hurricane again. That was a really bad one.

          Last week, the FL panhandle had 500 families evacuated because of fire. Any long dry spell means forest fires in FL.

          Liked by 2 people

    1. I remember a very strange track that Hurricane Ivan took in 2004. Joe Bastardi was working at AccuWeather at the time, and I followed his reporting on Ivan.

      Basically, Ivan made landfall in the Gulf at the Alabama and Florida panhandle. The remnants continued on to reenter the Atlantic near Washington, D.C., then made a right turn and headed down to coast where it crossed southern Florida and back into the Gulf. Ivan recrossed its former track (making a complete circle) and made landfall for the third time at the Texas and Louisiana border.

      It never regained strength at any point after entering the Atlantic, and remained a tropical depression at best.

      Here’s a map showing the complete track.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. Well – that certainly is strange, woot – but, one might think a hurricane can ‘swirl’ around – not make a 90-degree – like an ‘L’ – as if someone was driving it – all I am saying – strange things happen around the panhandle – is that normal?

        I remember riding these storms with the ‘storm sisters’ here – and it makes my head spin – however – that last one that hovered over the island was abnormal – imho – like there was a big hand on it – making it unable to move – remember that?

        Like

        1. Don’t forget the mysterious jump Katrina took before land fall that stopped it from going straight into New Orleans. Then in the following years all the start ups coming off the coast of Africa that you used to watch every year before then just stopped making it out to sea. Then all the tropical storms and depressions that just hang off the shore and drop rain days on end when they had been heading inland. Weather says I want to go inland but then they get stuck just off shore. The last was big indicator was the last hurricane that wanted go into Florida but got stuck in some sort of epic fight trying to get there several days before it tracked out to sea. None of these things do I remember happening when I grew up to such a degree.

          Speaking theoretically, we’ve been sending planes into the middle of hurricanes since we’ve been kids to study them. It’s not just to track their power and direction but to study all facets of the storm. HARP is quite likely real or at least the concept and by this time it’s likely not just something done from a very far distance but would have been improved greatly so it can deployed more easily.

          Deployment of such a thing would have to be kept secret because a hurricane is likely going to cause damage somewhere and if your on the blame line letting it strike one place and not the other than your going to have liability if it becomes known.

          Whatever tech is involved to do this by this time would likely be in reach of non governmental players and could likely be kept clandestine by people rich enough to deploy such technology though it likely comes at risk of detection after being used more than once or twice.

          Like

      2. Yes, but caused a lot of flooding around here when it returned. The storm water runoff system was overwhelmed to the point that housed were flooded near the open rivers that serve as part of the system.

        Like

      3. That was a very controversial track too as I recall b/c the low pressure split once it hit the Atlantic. Somewhere I still have a picture of Ivan stored. Everything thought it was going to hit New Orleans and be a huge disaster, b/c at that time the levee infrastructure hadn’t been upgraded and they were predicting massive flooding and destruction in New Orleans. But it went through Mobile instead.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. If you dare..click the tweet to see the rest…unfuckingbelievable

    Liked by 8 people

    1. I do not buy GE no ham for me do not go to movies do not do games.
      So if every American boy cuts these Chinese companies they go broke.

      Liked by 4 people

    1. The same person who tweeted this had previously tweeted:

      “Dear Judge Sullivan, stop messing about and dismiss the charges. Don’t be a knob head.”

      as his version of an amicus brief. Someone commented, “I mean, it’s basically yours but with more words.”

      Liked by 6 people

      1. Here Steve…

        AlextheChick Explains: (comment from Ace of Spades)

        “…I’ll start at the beginning of the end – appropriate disclaimer, I have never done anything Federal criminal law and I’m going off memory for some of this so go lick that salt lick over there for what I am typing.

        The baby steps version:

        The prosecutor files criminal charges. Those charges then go before a judge. It is the judge who is in charge of the management of the case, not the prosecutor. Since a guilty plea was entered, that means there is no fact finding part of the case (juries find facts, judges apply the law), so all that is left is for the judge to apply the law.

        The rules and precedent permit the withdrawal of a guilty plea. However, such a withdrawal is constrained to certain circumstances in order to streamline the judicial process. You can’t just say I’m withdrawing that plea and it’s withdrawn. The judge has to approve it. What Powell has been fighting with Sullivan about is that Sullivan refuses to grant that withdrawal.

        Somewhat similar is that the DOJ cannot just walk into a courtroom and say “our bad” and drop the case. The judge must approve the motion to dismiss the case. Now, by rule and precedent, the judge has basically no discretion there. While it is the judge’s case to manage, it is the DOJ who presents the prosecution. When the DOJ says yeah, there’s nothing to prosecute, the judge is required to sign an order saying motion granted.

        Sullivan has not done that. Not only that, he is now doing something that I had no idea was permissible in criminal cases and that is asking for amicus (friend of the court) briefs as to why that shouldn’t be allowed. At least that’s what it looks like.

        Maybe this is permissible but I’ve never heard of it but, again, not even close to my area of expertise.

        An intervenor is a person or entity that is not a party to a case but who has an interest in the case and this is permitted to intervene (join in) the case as a party. That is not permissible in criminal cases. We do not have private Federal criminal prosecutions.

        So, the tl;dr is that Sullivan is just making shit up here and is refusing to grant the motion to dismiss to be an asshole to Flynn and to tell Barr to kiss his ass.

        Posted by: alexthechick – Ragebunny. Hopping all around.

        Liked by 7 people

        1. Yep. This person hedged because perhaps federal procedure is not the same as what they’re used to…so my main question at this point is, is it in fact a RULE or merely a precedent that the judge basically rubberstamps a prosecution motion to dismiss?

          Even if “only” a precedent…this is, well, unprecedented (ha, ha)–highly irregular.

          And highly infuriating.

          I said I didn’t trust this judge the other night. Right now, at this instant, Flynn is still “guilty” because the case is not dismissed and he wasn’t allowed to withdraw his plea. Someone is convicted the instant they plead guilty. Thus, technically, a felon.

          As I read it: Judge has to allow the plea to be withdrawn OR vacate the plea (if that’s allowed) somehow, then dismiss the case (preferably with prejudice). Then and only then is Flynn exonerated and truly off the hook from this persecution.

          Liked by 5 people

        2. If you think about it even without Sullivan being a “knob head”, this is a weird situation. The prosecution has won the case, got its conviction, and now is asking for a dismissal. Generally you don’t throw in the towel after you’ve won! (It is the correct thing to do in this case, don’t get me wrong–it’s just a very unusual thing.)

          It’d be like a football team requesting a review for a penalty on the defense, on a play where they themselves had just scored a touchdown.

          Liked by 3 people

          1. The thing is, Flynn pleaded guilty under duress. That would be, at least in my mind, a mitigating circumstance, and certainly worthy of investigating the Brady aspects of the prosecution withholding exculpatory evidence (by the truckload).

            I think Sullivan has been leaned on, but hard. And I’d almost be certain that it’s from the highest levels (or lowest, when one considers the proximity to hell) of the Klintoon and Øbozo camps.

            Sully has just sullied his record on one of the most important cases ever. No “really good shoe” for him…
            (here’s hoping he gets the boot, instead)…

            Liked by 3 people

  3. OT has a very short piece by SD on Judge Sullivan’s minute order that ends on the hopeful note that this might piss off AG Barr so that he releases even more damaging info against the plotters even sooner.

    Decent thought. Maybe it will.

    Liked by 9 people

    1. Where did Sundance ever get the idea that more information might be dropped? Pretty safe bet at this point in time. It may deal directly or indirectly to Flynn but all of this nonsense is connected back one way or the other.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. Liked by 3 people

      1. Sounds like Michael Isikoff is the bag man again for the info big enough to take all the declass off the table giving media something more important to talk about, while also finding a way to hang 911 around Trumps neck. My gosh if so. Trumps got to be laughing to some extent except where it involves having to do damage to SA relations (they’ll push Kashoggi into this too if they can ) and Bush is likely not laughing at all now that he’s become fodder along with the entire 911 commission. Meanwhile O will likely keep his head down. The Summer has just got a lot more interesting if this has legs.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. ▶Anonymous 05/12/20 (Tue) 17:13:13 a0f7c1 (6) No.9144650
    File (hide): 38eb5680ee49679⋯.png (1022.52 KB, 1731×695, 1731:695, ClipboardImage.png) (h) (u)

    >>9144545
    covid survival greater than purity of ivory soap
    Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof – text, media, or otherwise – do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administrat

    Liked by 8 people

  5. Liked by 7 people

  6. Ed also said that the satchel contains 4-5 batches of intel. O officials that unmasked
    Flynn is one batch. Brennan suppressing that Russia wanted Crooked to win is another.
    More to come.🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿

    Liked by 10 people

      1. I watched segment, Ed used malleable. Maybe Putin doesn’t know proper english word???
        Also H/T to Fred Fleitz, he discovered the info first.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I’m sure Putin meant “malleable.” From his point of view he’d rather have a US president he can bend and shape to his will.

          Molly is being a bit snarky and saying “malevolent” is a better word for Hitlary, which is true, AND funny, but it really has nothing to do with what Putin wanted.

          Liked by 5 people

    1. Liked by 7 people

    2. Liked by 6 people

      1. All they have to do is everybody go outside, in solidarity, and defy the Nazi police state to do anything about it.

        Which Gruesome won’t be able to do anything about.

        They don’t have the manpower, not even close, if even a fraction of the California population stands up.

        Liked by 5 people

    1. China is Asshoe!

      Or rather…the CCP is Asshoe!

      The Chinese people would love to have that beef.
      Especially now, since beef contains Zinc which helps us in fighting off the ChiComVirus.

      Liked by 7 people

  7. Liked by 7 people

        1. Clearly it was just the major players at that level, people like Comey, McCabe, etc. Probably some we didn’t see as *directly* involved with the “Russian Collusion” BS.

          How many people can fit in the Oval Office. Comfortably, sitting in all the sofas and chairs, I’d guess no more than 12.

          Liked by 3 people

  8. Nevertheless, Sidney Powell Persisted
    https://townhall.com/columnists/larryoconnor/2020/05/12/nevertheless-sidney-powell-persisted-n2568654?mc_cid=822a8d1cb7&mc_eid=b44f7d8fbb

    “As Flynn’s new counsel, Powell inherited a client who had pled guilty to Mueller’s prosecutors, articulated that guilty plea in open court, and was merely awaiting the inevitable sentencing that could lead to a humiliating jail sentence.

    Powell examined the case and advised on a radical Hail Mary defense: Withdraw your plea and fight these corrupt bastards. Flynn, drawing on his military career and training, trusted in Powell’s leadership and charged up that hill.”

    Liked by 3 people

    1. “Nevertheless she persisted”

      I see those bumper stickers around and no longer have any memory of what they refer to…something really not all that important, methinks.

      Like

  9. Theory

    FACTS
    1. Recall Q has said (and I paraphrase): “Sometimes you can’t tell people, sometimes you must show them.”

    2. Did you know…..? In 24 previous rulings in the Flynn case over the past several years, Judge Sullivan has DENIED motions to all amicus briefs EACH AND EVERY TIME. Now he is inviting them??? 🤔

    3. The two-tiered justice system has long been a major issue. Folks like Hillary Clinton are not charged for blatant felonies, but others get the book thrown at them. It’s a big club, and we ain’t in it.

    4. The Flynn case is HIGHLY visible right now in light of: A) liberals going berserk last week when the DoJ filed to dismiss the case, and B) Obama conference call (and reaction) was leaked to the media.

    5. Sidney Powell has worked with Judge Sullivan in the past. She even cites him and his quality as a judge in her books. She has a very high regard for him.

    ————————

    The above are all facts.

    So, here is the theory in the form of a question.

    WHAT IF JUDGE SULLIVAN IS MERELY PLAYING THE ROLE OF A CORRUPT JUDGE IN SERVICE TO #3 ABOVE??

    Consider…

    AG Barr controlled the timing of the DoJ delivering long-sought Brady material to Flynn/Powell, a result of the review Barr ordered for the case. We can be sure that when said material was delivered to Flynn/Powell, AND when the DoJ made motion to dismiss the case, it was because AG Barr was READY to do so.

    What was the effect??

    Panic. And Obama made his conference call (effectively breaking radio silence on this case). ALSO…now that the judge has opened the door to amicus briefs, it will be HIGHLY instructive to see WHO files briefs opposing the case’s dismissal IN SPITE OF ALL THAT IS KNOWN AT THIS POINT.

    IS THIS A VERY CLEVER PLOY TO GET previously unknown bad actors to expose themselves??
    .
    .
    .
    We know there is a plan because Q has told us so.
    We know that nothing can stop what is coming. Nothing.
    We know that Q team “has it all” and that “FISA works both ways” (for them and for us)
    We know that AG Barr controls the timing of both the reveal last week as well as when Durham report drops.
    We know there is MUCH MORE declas coming….reportedly FAR WORSE than what has recently been disclosed.
    We know that Richard Grenell can make the satchel documents (given to AG Barr) public whenever he chooses.
    .
    .
    And we know that we are watching a movie, because Q told us so.

    TL/DR

    IS JUDGE SULLIVAN IS MERELY PLAYING THE ROLE OF A CORRUPT JUDGE??

    Like

    1. “2. Did you know…..? In 24 previous rulings in the Flynn case over the past several years, Judge Sullivan has DENIED motions to all amicus briefs EACH AND EVERY TIME. Now he is inviting them??? 🤔”
      ___________

      I didn’t know this.

      I’d read that Sullivan had denied amicus brief motions “24 times”.
      But I didn’t know that he had done that in the Flynn case.

      I hope your theory is right!

      But I think that there is a very real possibility that Sullivan is a swamp creature.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Liked by 2 people

  11. Doug Ross 🔵 (@directorblue) Tweeted:
    @Techno_Fog @SidneyPowell1 Need to call or write the Judge?

    Be polite and concise, please: I would ask: “are forged FD-302’s not enough to dismiss this case?”

    Judge Emmet G. Sullivan
    Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building
    One Columbus Circle NE
    Washington DC 20002-8003
    202-502-4000

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s