Russia! Russia!! Russia!!!

[K@th]

Do judges typically provide a reason when they recuse themselves?

[clubgop]

I do get it that many Americans basically just go strictly along the partylines and never look at these things objectively.

How many times do we have to tell you that we simply don't know what it is you want. America to go to war with Russia? Trump to be removed from office? My god, man, make a list of what it is you want, we can discuss that.

crickets

[The Conservative]

Do judges typically provide a reason when they recuse themselves?

Most of the time yes, they are required to, otherwise, they have to do their duty.

[Fife]

Do judges typically provide a reason when they recuse themselves?

Not necessarily, no. Judges do have a duty to disclose potential conflicts of interest unless they just go ahead and recuse themselves; sometimes parties can and do waive objections to conflicts.

[K@th]

Do judges typically provide a reason when they recuse themselves?

Not necessarily, no. Judges do have a duty to disclose potential conflicts of interest unless they just go ahead and recuse themselves; sometimes parties can and do waive objections to conflicts.

Ok. So why is it mysterious?

[Fife]

Do judges typically provide a reason when they recuse themselves?

Not necessarily, no. Judges do have a duty to disclose potential conflicts of interest unless they just go ahead and recuse themselves; sometimes parties can and do waive objections to conflicts.

Ok. So why is it mysterious?

Did you look at the link? The mystery is that no reason was provided. That's a mystery, and leads to speculation of all sorts.

Anyway that whole FISA system is as crooked as a barrel of snakes; you get that, right?

[kybkh]

Obama Appointed Judge Mysteriously Recuses Himself From Michael Flynn Case

The case against former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn has taken a strange turn, as U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras abruptly recused himself Thursday night with no explanation. Contreras is an Obama appointee who also sat on the FISA court while the Trump team was under surveillance by the Obama administration. Judge Emmet Sullivan, an Bill Clinton appointee, was randomly assigned to take over the case after Contreras' recusal.

[snip]

Between the recused judge who sits on the FISA court, Sally Yates' transcript 'trap,' and the fact that the FBI reportedly interviewed Flynn without an attorney present, it will be interesting to see how the case against Michael Flynn holds up.

Can someone explain to me how anything this judge has heard concerning this case is not invalidated by his recusal assume he has recuse himself with cause?

[Fife]

It's a mystery, verily. At least for the moment.

[K@th]

Did you look at the link? The mystery is that no reason was provided. That's a mystery, and leads to speculation of all sorts.

Anyway that whole FISA system is as crooked as a barrel of snakes; you get that, right?

I did look at the link, yes. That's why I asked if they typically provide a reason. You said no. Are all recusals mysterious, then?

Yes FISA must be destroyed.

[C-Mag]

Did you look at the link? The mystery is that no reason was provided. That's a mystery, and leads to speculation of all sorts.

Anyway that whole FISA system is as crooked as a barrel of snakes; you get that, right?

I did look at the link, yes. That's why I asked if they typically provide a reason. You said no. Are all recusals mysterious, then?

Yes FISA must be destroyed.

It's pretty clear powerful players in our government are trying to take down Trump; and it increasingly appears that the FBI and DOJ actively worked to clear the road for Hillary Clinton to become POTUS while simultaneously work against Donald Trump.

Because of this, and the number of lies by our Federal legal system, everything is under suspicion.