For the first time I think Trump might actually be in trouble.

[Synthaholic]

I'm going to SO enjoy the butthurt when Mueller nails these criminals.

 

[JoeB131]

More assumptions, or do you have a secret inside source?

Well, I can read the news and understand it. Clearly you can't.

But you can keep with, "he won't be indicted, he won't be indicted, he won't be indicted.... OH SHIT, THEY INDICTED HIM!!!"

 

[AntonToo]

Been listening to ABC radio all morning and it sounds bad for Trump based on what's being reported.
The Last report heard said that Flynn was going to testify that Trump directed him to talk to the Russians only hours after the Obama administration implimented new sanctions against them.

Of course I don't know what's legal and what isn't but to my layman's ears this sounds potentially bad.

Does it prove collusion based on what I heard? Not in my opinion but it does speak to the idea that we have one president & one government at a time.

This is not me condemning Trump, it's just me absorbing the breaking news.
I'd ask how you all see it but this board is so over the top partisan I know the responses I'd get before you hit enter. So instead I'm going to create a poll.

Flynn was instructed by the transition team to contact the officials of several governments to make them aware of the incoming administrations opinion on an upcoming UN vote. Nothing improper or illegal about that.


.

Bullshit spin.

Here is CIVILIAN Trump interfering in Russian response to sanctions, in direct violation of Logan Act.

He sent Flynn to plead with Russians to change their response to sanctions and then went on to publicly (because he is a fucking dumbass) praise Putin for altering his policy.

Yeah, he got a subdued response, and that hurt the US, HOW?
.

I don’t know. But that barely even matters, the law does not work by no-harm-no-foul principle.

Flynn and Trump seem to know that, which is why they engaged in the cover up.

 

[OKTexas]

He testified that he was aware of only 3. That's because all of these agencies do not report to him.

Stop lying.

Clapper Confirms: "17 Intelligence Agencies" Russia Story Was False!


.

Clapper did not refute that 17 intelligence agencies agreed that Russia did the hacking. That is a shameless lie. I would call you a liar, but you never actually watched the video and just regurgitated a favorable headline. So, in essence, you aren't even informed enough to be a liar.

The 17 intelligence agencies talking point was a blatant LIE.

Nope. 17 intelligence agencies agreed that Russia did the hacking. That's a fact. To the surprise of exactly nobody on the planet, you are uninformed and don't have any idea what you are talking about.

I'm sure that you are very sure of that. However, the assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.

Opinion | Trump criticizes media over alleged mind-meld of ‘17 intelligence agencies’ over Russia meddling

Actually the DNI is an collects, compiles and disseminates the intel from the agencies, they don't produce anything independently.


.

 

[OKTexas]

It was proven that not all 17 agencies agreed. More liberal BS...

You just claimed there weren't 17 agencies, I proved you wrong, and you don't have to balls to admit you were wrong.

And you were wrong, the DNI coordinates intel from the agencies, they produce nothing independently.

Who We Are


.

 

[OKTexas]

More assumptions, or do you have a secret inside source?

Well, I can read the news and understand it. Clearly you can't.

But you can keep with, "he won't be indicted, he won't be indicted, he won't be indicted.... OH SHIT, THEY INDICTED HIM!!!"

All I've said is show me the evidence, to date all I've seen is regressive wishful thinking. Don't you find it a bit suspicious that of the two who have plead guilty, there are no charges for underlying crimes?


.

 

[OKTexas]

Been listening to ABC radio all morning and it sounds bad for Trump based on what's being reported.
The Last report heard said that Flynn was going to testify that Trump directed him to talk to the Russians only hours after the Obama administration implimented new sanctions against them.

Of course I don't know what's legal and what isn't but to my layman's ears this sounds potentially bad.

Does it prove collusion based on what I heard? Not in my opinion but it does speak to the idea that we have one president & one government at a time.

This is not me condemning Trump, it's just me absorbing the breaking news.
I'd ask how you all see it but this board is so over the top partisan I know the responses I'd get before you hit enter. So instead I'm going to create a poll.

Flynn was instructed by the transition team to contact the officials of several governments to make them aware of the incoming administrations opinion on an upcoming UN vote. Nothing improper or illegal about that.


.

Bullshit spin.

Here is CIVILIAN Trump interfering in Russian response to sanctions, in direct violation of Logan Act.

He sent Flynn to plead with Russians to change their response to sanctions and then went on to publicly (because he is a fucking dumbass) praise Putin for altering his policy.

Yeah, he got a subdued response, and that hurt the US, HOW?
.

I don’t know. But that barely even matters, the law does not work by no-harm-no-foul principle.

Flynn and Trump seem to know that, which is why they engaged in the cover up.

Actually it does try reading the law, they weren't trying to interfere with US policy or harm the US in any way. They simply asked the Russians not to over react.


.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No one's whining here but you, fool! Every time you guys dig up another accusation to throw at Donald, it turns out that either Hillary, Obama or the DNC were actually the ones that did it!!! Hillarious!!!

That's not positive information for Donald Trump, though, as the election is over. So you're not doing the job I gave you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

they weren't trying to interfere with US policy

Except to imply that the new administration would not maintain it. Wait, that's exactly then definition of trying to interfere with US policy.

 

[OKTexas]

they weren't trying to interfere with US policy

Except to imply that the new administration would not maintain it. Wait, that's exactly then definition of trying to interfere with US policy.

More assumptions.


.

 

[oreo]

Just wondering did you looked at the date of your link Feb. 2017. At that time there's a lot of information we didn’t know.

Mueller investigation started May or June 2017.

Yep, Flynn plead guilty to lying in his statements to the FBI concerning his Dec phone calls. Mueller used those statements, not new ones. Hell Flynn was gone in early Feb.


.

You are lying dude. Go back and read your previous link ( Flynn changed story to FBI, no charge expected - CNNPolitics)
That was Feb. 2017 ————- Dec. 1, 2017 Flynn plead guilty.

Two of Trump corrupted officials plead guilty and 2 was charged. Next Kushner then Trump. All these people should be LOCKED UP.

Sorry you're so illiterate, most adults can tell when you're talking about a Jan interview, concerning phone calls in Dec, it would be the previous Dec, not the upcoming one. The statements were made in Jan 2017 concerning calls made in Dec 2016. DIP!


.

Hello? Anybody home?

Flynn PLEAD GUILTY TO A FELONY

GUILTY

For fibbing, the same reason Trump fired him, nothing more. Oh and Comey wasn't planning to pursue even that, just shows that Mueller is wanting to just put notches on his belt, no matter how trivial.


.

There's nothing trivial about Obstruction of Justice. Mueller could have nailed Flynn and his son to the wall on several charges--even one involving some type of conspiracy Flynn was involved in for basically kidnapping a Muslim cleric in this country for Turkey, with Turkey offering Flynn 15 million to do it. There are actually witness's to that meeting.

Washington (CNN)Former White House national security adviser Mike Flynn and his son are alleged to have been offered as much as $15 million to forcibly remove from the US a Muslim cleric wanted by Turkey, The Wall Street Journal reports. The Journal reported the FBI questioned at least four people in regards to a mid-December meeting in New York at the "21" Club. Discussions between Flynn and Turkish representatives supposedly took place there, according to the Journal.The Journal said the people who described the alleged proposal didn't attend the December meeting and didn't have direct knowledge of the details. There's no indication that money changed hands or that an agreement was made.The discussions allegedly included how to transport Fethullah Gulen, a Muslim leader who Erdogan has accused of being behind a failed military coup to overthrow him, on a private jet to the Turkish prison island of Imrali

.
WSJ: Mueller probes Flynn role in plot to deliver cleric to Turkey - CNNPolitics

Receiving 525K from Turkey, never disclosing it, receiving money from Russia, never disclosing it--the list goes on and on.
Michael Flynn's Russia payment likely broke disclosure laws, lawmakers say
Michael Flynn Was Paid to Represent Turkey’s Interests During Trump Campaign
Michael Flynn’s role in Mideast nuclear project could compound legal issues

So obviously Mueller would have wanted to know what Flynn had--before he let him plea down to a simple guilty plea for lying to the FBI. Mueller also got Papadopolous to plead guillty, and he was doing a dial a crook for two months prior to him officially being charged.
Papadopoulos' guilty plea is much bigger problem for Trump than the Manafort indictment - CNNPolitics

Jeff Sessions is in yuuuuge trouble too.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions may be facing perjury charges.

We can now officially say that this administration is out of the frying pan and in the fire--

I love this one-- Michael Flynn chanting "lock her up", and stating what a National Security risk Hillary Clinton was----

 

[EverCurious]

Been listening to ABC radio all morning and it sounds bad for Trump based on what's being reported.

C'mon, Gramps! Do you really think Big Media will ever report ANYTHING not to sound bad for Trump? If Trump butters his bread with apple jelly, they say the end is near for his administration. Only way Trump is in trouble is if they try to kill him, or they try to hijack the country and overthrow him. Then the whole country will be in trouble.

Well gee, professor, where is all the factual information exonerating Trump, then? There are media outlets that would LOVE to report it. Go on, superstar, sieze your 15 minutes, call these media outlets, and point them to this exonerative information!

Where’s the information that he did anything?

Inappropriate response. I did not claim such info exists or that I had it. I was responding to the whiny idea that the media only reports info making Trump look bad, which implies that exonerative info exists and is not being reported. I would call you a moron, but you a have made it clear that you dont actually believe the stupid shit you post. So I'll just say you are a dishonest little troll.

Please don't play the accomplished logician for us. Not only haven't you the most basic knowledge of it, but you need to go up about three floors to reach the level of calling anyone else a moron.

C'mon, Gramps! Do you really think Big Media will ever report ANYTHING not to sound bad for Trump? If Trump butters his bread with apple jelly, they say the end is near for his administration. Only way Trump is in trouble is if they try to kill him, or they try to hijack the country and overthrow him. Then the whole country will be in trouble.

Well gee, professor, where is all the factual information exonerating Trump, then? There are media outlets that would LOVE to report it. Go on, superstar, sieze your 15 minutes, call these media outlets, and point them to this exonerative information!

Where’s the information that he did anything?

Inappropriate response. I did not claim such info exists or that I had it. I was responding to the whiny idea that the media only reports info making Trump look bad, which implies that exonerative info exists and is not being reported. I would call you a moron, but you a have made it clear that you dont actually believe the stupid shit you post. So I'll just say you are a dishonest little troll.

Well it’s statistically correct. They study the percentage of negative news. You should read up

A few months back, a study showed that all of the MSM were between 96 to 98% all negative news on Trump. Genius FFI doesn't understand the differences between claims, implications and spin, he's too busy sorting out all of his other fallacies. Only Fox was reasonable in their reporting. It isn't a matter of what real news is out there, but a matter of how you spin it. Some people like that ass on ABC, spun it right out the door. He should be fired.

Related - you forgot OAN (One America News)

 

[AntonToo]

Been listening to ABC radio all morning and it sounds bad for Trump based on what's being reported.
The Last report heard said that Flynn was going to testify that Trump directed him to talk to the Russians only hours after the Obama administration implimented new sanctions against them.

Of course I don't know what's legal and what isn't but to my layman's ears this sounds potentially bad.

Does it prove collusion based on what I heard? Not in my opinion but it does speak to the idea that we have one president & one government at a time.

This is not me condemning Trump, it's just me absorbing the breaking news.
I'd ask how you all see it but this board is so over the top partisan I know the responses I'd get before you hit enter. So instead I'm going to create a poll.

Flynn was instructed by the transition team to contact the officials of several governments to make them aware of the incoming administrations opinion on an upcoming UN vote. Nothing improper or illegal about that.


.

Bullshit spin.

Here is CIVILIAN Trump interfering in Russian response to sanctions, in direct violation of Logan Act.

He sent Flynn to plead with Russians to change their response to sanctions and then went on to publicly (because he is a fucking dumbass) praise Putin for altering his policy.

Yeah, he got a subdued response, and that hurt the US, HOW?
.

I don’t know. But that barely even matters, the law does not work by no-harm-no-foul principle.

Flynn and Trump seem to know that, which is why they engaged in the cover up.

Actually it does try reading the law, they weren't trying to interfere with US policy or harm the US in any way. They simply asked the Russians not to over react.
.

I did. You don’t know what the fuck you are talking about with this “harm” nonsense.

You can have the best intentions for United States and go to jail because your means were ILLEGAL.

Civilian Trump was contradicting Obama’s policy toward hostile Russia and influencing their response towards us. That is not permitted under Logan Act.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And none of that is wrong, let alone illegal.
He disagreed with Obama's sanctions, and wanted that government to know about it. Doesn't mean anything. But naturally, this is not going to stop the MSM from fiercely implying that it is wrong and shows collusion. This same media that stood in front of Hillary and Obama carrying a heavy shield to deflect the Benghazi scandal.
A President instructing an underling to communicate for him is as common as a rainy day in Seattle.

You can't have your cake and it it too, tard.

Trump claimed Obama didn't do anything about Putin, implying Obama should have been tougher.

You can't parrot that bullshit, and then at the same time say it's okay for Trump to WEAKEN the sanctions.

Fucking hypocrites. I honestly don't know how you tards are able to compartmentalize your brains like that. Your heads should be going supernova from cognitive dissonance.

But of course that would require actual cognition on your part.

What part of this is not illegal do you not understand?
I may not like it, you obviously don't like it - it may stink, it may have been a lousy decision, it may just generally suck all the way around - BUT IT IS NOT ILLEGAL. Obama did the same exact thing in his 2nd term...but instead of saying it via an underling - he said it himself and got caught with an open mic.
This kind of shit is far more common than any of us want to know. But of course you ,and the left media will try and make this the most outrageous event in American history.

Obama did the same exact thing in his 2nd term...but instead of saying it via an underling - he said it himself and got caught with an open mic.

It's not "the exact same thing" at all. Obama was the president at the time.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm going to SO enjoy the butthurt when Mueller nails these criminals.

From my perspective, knowing that one silly side is going to lose, I'll be sure to appreciate their butthurt, whichever side that is.
.

 

[JoeB131]

All I've said is show me the evidence, to date all I've seen is regressive wishful thinking. Don't you find it a bit suspicious that of the two who have plead guilty, there are no charges for underlying crimes?

Guy, we could show you film of Trump shaking hands with Putin while two hookers piss on him, and you'd still be in denial.

you'll be in denial up until the point they are frog-marching Trump out of the white house.