Been workfagging, just looked at the board a couple times, this post was one that I saw and thought interdasting.

Then I came back and anons second post was like the third post I saw. Seemed like a

Notable Insight by the OP

>>10842697 pb

▶Anonymous 09/29/20 (Tue) 16:30:41fc0111 (1) No.10842697

Flynn hearing had a tiny detail I found interesting.

Sydney Powell said she spoke with POTUS to give a general update on the case and asked him not to issue a pardon because it resulted in a meaning that the crime never happened.

She needs Flynn completely exonerated so she can help him get his losses back.

If the crime never happened, he suffered no harm.

She raised Contreras should have already recused before Flynn plead guilty in his Court.

That too was a Giant detail that Sullivan tried to run over and interrupted her before she concluded her entire point which involved him.

Basically what Sydney was saying is Contreras hearing should have been voided because he was on the FISA Court and was compromised by the dinner with Strzok and Page. If Contreras didn't void the plea, Sullivan was required to. Sullivan claimed he didn't know the reason Contreras recused and weakly said Flynn perjured himself regardless of what she is now saying. That was a way to reassert jurisdiction over the case. ( weak attempt IMO )

Coontreras has a problem because he allowed the hearing where Flynn entered the guilty plea to go on and an order to come out of that hearing. He lost his Judicial Immunity that day and Sydney made that known.

What she said suggested she also thinks Sullivan may have lost his immunity also.

>>10842697 ( me ) (last bread lawfag jr. ) after thought to better explain why I am saying this.

Sydney said "VOID" when referring to the status of the guilty plea that happened in Contreras Court. She referred to it in past tense. Not should have been, she said it WAS VOID.

The only way that can be true ( Sullivan didn't dispute her position he just changed the talking point ) is if Fraud Upon The Court was the reason for recusal. hat means Contreras had to not only recuse but render all decisions by him void.

A Judges decisions, after recusal, are not voided in any other circumstance . They can be reversed but the word VOID was the key