- Banned
- #1,001
Hoover's reign of terror started way before Obama was born- just an FYINever vote for a presidential candidate that has trouble showing where he was born.....
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hoover's reign of terror started way before Obama was born- just an FYINever vote for a presidential candidate that has trouble showing where he was born.....
Haha, when cops interview people they don’t always lay out everything they know, that would be, how you say.... fucking retarded! Part of questioning somebody is to see if they are giving you honest and reliable answers. Flynn didn’t do that. That’s not a trap that’s just catching somebody lyingThe FBI knew what the conversation was and lied that they did not know. Saying one word wrong was considered a 'lie.' Aside from that, it was not a crime for Flynn to talk to Kysliak and ask that the Obama sanctions (on Russia) be lifted. You seem to be taking a myopic view of what happened or may not have availed yourself of the whole story. In fact, your post smacks of Democrat propaganda if you ask me.Perjury trap?! That’s a joke right? So because the FBI knew Flynn had been talking to the Russians and then asked him if he had been talking to the Russians which he chose to lie about and say NO... this is a devious perjury trap? Come on man. You don’t expect people to take that argument seriously do you?First of all, every Presidential transition team has had conversations with foreign entities. Also, Flynn was not urged to get a lawyer, in fact, the FBI falsely claimed their questioning of him was no big deal. The FBI agents that interviewed Flynn said he (Flynn) did not give any indication of deception. Flynn was never told that by his first set of lawyers. It is not 'black and white' the FBI lied as well and set up a purjury-trap in order to compile more fake evidence on their now debunked Russia-Trump investigation.Of course they had a legitimate basis to interview Flynn. They were investigating Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Flynn was lying about contacts with the Russians.... it doesn’t get and more black and white. What aren’t you understanding?I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty. The fact that the FBI put pressure on him during an interrogation is exactly what cops do when interrogating suspects. Anybody want to give the Flynn defense another shot?
I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty.
Well, as Andrew McCarthy writes......
This goes to the point I’ve been pressing for years. There was no good-faith basis for an investigation of General Flynn. Under federal law, a false statement made to investigators is not actionable unless it is material. That means it must be pertinent to a matter that is properly under investigation. If the FBI did not have a legitimate investigative basis to interview Flynn, then that fact should have been disclosed as exculpatory information. It would have enabled his counsel to argue that any inaccurate statements he made were immaterial.
Drug Cartels and other felons were afforded more rights than the set up that they did on Flynn.Haha, when cops interview people they don’t always lay out everything they know, that would be, how you say.... fucking retarded! Part of questioning somebody is to see if they are giving you honest and reliable answers. Flynn didn’t do that. That’s not a trap that’s just catching somebody lyingThe FBI knew what the conversation was and lied that they did not know. Saying one word wrong was considered a 'lie.' Aside from that, it was not a crime for Flynn to talk to Kysliak and ask that the Obama sanctions (on Russia) be lifted. You seem to be taking a myopic view of what happened or may not have availed yourself of the whole story. In fact, your post smacks of Democrat propaganda if you ask me.Perjury trap?! That’s a joke right? So because the FBI knew Flynn had been talking to the Russians and then asked him if he had been talking to the Russians which he chose to lie about and say NO... this is a devious perjury trap? Come on man. You don’t expect people to take that argument seriously do you?First of all, every Presidential transition team has had conversations with foreign entities. Also, Flynn was not urged to get a lawyer, in fact, the FBI falsely claimed their questioning of him was no big deal. The FBI agents that interviewed Flynn said he (Flynn) did not give any indication of deception. Flynn was never told that by his first set of lawyers. It is not 'black and white' the FBI lied as well and set up a purjury-trap in order to compile more fake evidence on their now debunked Russia-Trump investigation.Of course they had a legitimate basis to interview Flynn. They were investigating Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Flynn was lying about contacts with the Russians.... it doesn’t get and more black and white. What aren’t you understanding?I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty. The fact that the FBI put pressure on him during an interrogation is exactly what cops do when interrogating suspects. Anybody want to give the Flynn defense another shot?
I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty.
Well, as Andrew McCarthy writes......
This goes to the point I’ve been pressing for years. There was no good-faith basis for an investigation of General Flynn. Under federal law, a false statement made to investigators is not actionable unless it is material. That means it must be pertinent to a matter that is properly under investigation. If the FBI did not have a legitimate investigative basis to interview Flynn, then that fact should have been disclosed as exculpatory information. It would have enabled his counsel to argue that any inaccurate statements he made were immaterial.
Wrong. According to fbi agents he didn’t appear to be deceptive. Seeing as they had his conversation, that’s pretty telling for them to make that statement.Haha, when cops interview people they don’t always lay out everything they know, that would be, how you say.... fucking retarded! Part of questioning somebody is to see if they are giving you honest and reliable answers. Flynn didn’t do that. That’s not a trap that’s just catching somebody lyingThe FBI knew what the conversation was and lied that they did not know. Saying one word wrong was considered a 'lie.' Aside from that, it was not a crime for Flynn to talk to Kysliak and ask that the Obama sanctions (on Russia) be lifted. You seem to be taking a myopic view of what happened or may not have availed yourself of the whole story. In fact, your post smacks of Democrat propaganda if you ask me.Perjury trap?! That’s a joke right? So because the FBI knew Flynn had been talking to the Russians and then asked him if he had been talking to the Russians which he chose to lie about and say NO... this is a devious perjury trap? Come on man. You don’t expect people to take that argument seriously do you?First of all, every Presidential transition team has had conversations with foreign entities. Also, Flynn was not urged to get a lawyer, in fact, the FBI falsely claimed their questioning of him was no big deal. The FBI agents that interviewed Flynn said he (Flynn) did not give any indication of deception. Flynn was never told that by his first set of lawyers. It is not 'black and white' the FBI lied as well and set up a purjury-trap in order to compile more fake evidence on their now debunked Russia-Trump investigation.Of course they had a legitimate basis to interview Flynn. They were investigating Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Flynn was lying about contacts with the Russians.... it doesn’t get and more black and white. What aren’t you understanding?I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty. The fact that the FBI put pressure on him during an interrogation is exactly what cops do when interrogating suspects. Anybody want to give the Flynn defense another shot?
I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty.
Well, as Andrew McCarthy writes......
This goes to the point I’ve been pressing for years. There was no good-faith basis for an investigation of General Flynn. Under federal law, a false statement made to investigators is not actionable unless it is material. That means it must be pertinent to a matter that is properly under investigation. If the FBI did not have a legitimate investigative basis to interview Flynn, then that fact should have been disclosed as exculpatory information. It would have enabled his counsel to argue that any inaccurate statements he made were immaterial.
oh i dunno. y'all wanna make up another bullshit IMPEACH or RUSSIA scenario or is the left done making shit up?I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty. The fact that the FBI put pressure on him during an interrogation is exactly what cops do when interrogating suspects. Anybody want to give the Flynn defense another shot?
that ain't no lie, you sure ain't playin.I’m not playing dumb, I’ve asked several times and nobody can explain how the “gotchya” works... lying was a conscious choice that Flynn made. There was no inappropriate force or trick.Don't play dumb about gotcha stuff. You know what it is, and how it works.I keep hearing this set up gotchya stuff... what the hell does that even mean? There is the truth and there is lying. No gotchyas. Flynn chose to lie. Plain and simpleWere the questions being asked, uhhh in concerning actual law breaking or were they asked in order to get a gotcha on Flynn ?Yes, by asking him questions they knew he would lie about. And they were right. He did. They knew the foreign agent would lie about his back door dealings to give the russians back their spyhouses.Like I said, you NEVER read the released FBI documents, they were trying hard to entrap him over something he didn't break the law on.
So that is the question, were they trying to set him up for political reasons, otherwise as a proxy to indirectly hurt Trump or were they truly seeking a truth in an investigation ??
I think they set him up to get Trump, because they could care less about Michael Flynn in the broader scheme of things. It's all usery with an ultimate goal in mind to get Trump.
The whole ordeal was to be put into context, and then the application of laws based upon past incidents or cases. Flynn was treated in the extreme as based upon alterior motives being sought after in the bigger picture surrounding politics or political assassinations being conducted by the swamp creatures.
The FBI was trying to root out ties between the Russian and the Trump campaign. Flynn was lying to everybody about contacts with Russians... he set himself up to be scrutinized
push him and he will eventually get an angry babyback boner and tell you that you're impossible and go run off to be stupid in front of someone else for awhile.Actually not. You never accept anything you don’t conceive to be conducive to your agenda.I’m asking questions which you seem totally ill equipped to answerYou are playing dumb,I’m not playing dumb, I’ve asked several times and nobody can explain how the “gotchya” works... lying was a conscious choice that Flynn made. There was no inappropriate force or trick.Don't play dumb about gotcha stuff. You know what it is, and how it works.I keep hearing this set up gotchya stuff... what the hell does that even mean? There is the truth and there is lying. No gotchyas. Flynn chose to lie. Plain and simpleWere the questions being asked, uhhh in concerning actual law breaking or were they asked in order to get a gotcha on Flynn ?Yes, by asking him questions they knew he would lie about. And they were right. He did. They knew the foreign agent would lie about his back door dealings to give the russians back their spyhouses.Like I said, you NEVER read the released FBI documents, they were trying hard to entrap him over something he didn't break the law on.
So that is the question, were they trying to set him up for political reasons, otherwise as a proxy to indirectly hurt Trump or were they truly seeking a truth in an investigation ??
I think they set him up to get Trump, because they could care less about Michael Flynn in the broader scheme of things. It's all usery with an ultimate goal in mind to get Trump.
The whole ordeal was to be put into context, and then the application of laws based upon past incidents or cases. Flynn was treated in the extreme as based upon alterior motives being sought after in the bigger picture surrounding politics or political assassinations being conducted by the swamp creatures.
The FBI was trying to root out ties between the Russian and the Trump campaign. Flynn was lying to everybody about contacts with Russians... he set himself up to be scrutinized
Law enforcement may know certain facts about a crime that they don't tell the interviewee however, that is to determine if who they are talking with is a perp. In the case of Flynn, they had the exact transcript of his call with Kysliak so they knew what he said. The fact he did not want to divulge everything OR he may have misremembered details is NOT a reason to indict nor it is any kind of crime. They were actually trying to use the Logan Act which has NEVER been prosecuted since the 1700s.Haha, when cops interview people they don’t always lay out everything they know, that would be, how you say.... fucking retarded! Part of questioning somebody is to see if they are giving you honest and reliable answers. Flynn didn’t do that. That’s not a trap that’s just catching somebody lyingThe FBI knew what the conversation was and lied that they did not know. Saying one word wrong was considered a 'lie.' Aside from that, it was not a crime for Flynn to talk to Kysliak and ask that the Obama sanctions (on Russia) be lifted. You seem to be taking a myopic view of what happened or may not have availed yourself of the whole story. In fact, your post smacks of Democrat propaganda if you ask me.Perjury trap?! That’s a joke right? So because the FBI knew Flynn had been talking to the Russians and then asked him if he had been talking to the Russians which he chose to lie about and say NO... this is a devious perjury trap? Come on man. You don’t expect people to take that argument seriously do you?First of all, every Presidential transition team has had conversations with foreign entities. Also, Flynn was not urged to get a lawyer, in fact, the FBI falsely claimed their questioning of him was no big deal. The FBI agents that interviewed Flynn said he (Flynn) did not give any indication of deception. Flynn was never told that by his first set of lawyers. It is not 'black and white' the FBI lied as well and set up a purjury-trap in order to compile more fake evidence on their now debunked Russia-Trump investigation.Of course they had a legitimate basis to interview Flynn. They were investigating Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Flynn was lying about contacts with the Russians.... it doesn’t get and more black and white. What aren’t you understanding?I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty. The fact that the FBI put pressure on him during an interrogation is exactly what cops do when interrogating suspects. Anybody want to give the Flynn defense another shot?
I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty.
Well, as Andrew McCarthy writes......
This goes to the point I’ve been pressing for years. There was no good-faith basis for an investigation of General Flynn. Under federal law, a false statement made to investigators is not actionable unless it is material. That means it must be pertinent to a matter that is properly under investigation. If the FBI did not have a legitimate investigative basis to interview Flynn, then that fact should have been disclosed as exculpatory information. It would have enabled his counsel to argue that any inaccurate statements he made were immaterial.
Maybe someday someone will watch the best dissection and deconstruction of the case against the FBI
and how Trump was targeted for a political hit by the democrat party and their whole apparatus.
Dore is a progressive. But no one has taken on Comey and Brennan and their gang like Dore and
Aaron Mate of Push Back. I wish one person would take the time to see this.
Maybe someday someone will watch the best dissection and deconstruction of the case against the FBI
and how Trump was targeted for a political hit by the democrat party and their whole apparatus.
Dore is a progressive. But no one has taken on Comey and Brennan and their gang like Dore and
Aaron Mate of Push Back. I wish one person would take the time to see this.
1) Since the FBI did not reveal it was a criminal inquiry and part of an investigation, THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION OF AN OATH. Flynn could have said the sky was pink and purple for all it mattered since he was NOT under oath in a 'friendly' conversation.Yeah intentionally lied when it was found out later that he didn't have too. He found out one thing though, and that is when dealing with a set up in which was hoping to find a bigger fish, him lying to throw off his assasins didn't do him any good in the long run, so yes it wasn't a good move for him, but thank God it all came out in the wash that the FBI went rogue.No, you can stop right there. He did not make a mistake. He intentionally lied. Please read up before commenting again.The fact he could not recall exactly what he said
1) Since the FBI did not reveal it was a criminal inquiry and part of an investigation, THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION OF AN OATH. Flynn could have said the sky was pink and purple for all it mattered since he was NOT under oath in a 'friendly' conversation.Yeah intentionally lied when it was found out later that he didn't have too. He found out one thing though, and that is when dealing with a set up in which was hoping to find a bigger fish, him lying to throw off his assasins didn't do him any good in the long run, so yes it wasn't a good move for him, but thank God it all came out in the wash that the FBI went rogue.No, you can stop right there. He did not make a mistake. He intentionally lied. Please read up before commenting again.The fact he could not recall exactly what he said
2) That 'omission' also denied Flynn his Miranda rights which were not read to him prior to a criminal interview, and the case should have been thrown out over that alone.
3) Since Flynn is a member of the Trump team, the TDS lying ass corrupt Dimocrat partisans who love Beria blow it all off since it got a 'bad guy', i.e. and American patriot and war hero. They hate America just that much.
Flynn's defense lawyers at the time should be disbarred for gross incompetence.
Where did that come from?1) Since the FBI did not reveal it was a criminal inquiry and part of an investigation, THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION OF AN OATH. Flynn could have said the sky was pink and purple for all it mattered since he was NOT under oath in a 'friendly' conversation.Yeah intentionally lied when it was found out later that he didn't have too. He found out one thing though, and that is when dealing with a set up in which was hoping to find a bigger fish, him lying to throw off his assasins didn't do him any good in the long run, so yes it wasn't a good move for him, but thank God it all came out in the wash that the FBI went rogue.No, you can stop right there. He did not make a mistake. He intentionally lied. Please read up before commenting again.The fact he could not recall exactly what he said
2) That 'omission' also denied Flynn his Miranda rights which were not read to him prior to a criminal interview, and the case should have been thrown out over that alone.
3) Since Flynn is a member of the Trump team, the TDS lying ass corrupt Dimocrat partisans who love Beria blow it all off since it got a 'bad guy', i.e. and American patriot and war hero. They hate America just that much.
Flynn's defense lawyers at the time should be disbarred for gross incompetence.
Here is another interesting document...
View attachment 331608
Maybe someday someone will watch the best dissection and deconstruction of the case against the FBI
and how Trump was targeted for a political hit by the democrat party and their whole apparatus.
Dore is a progressive. But no one has taken on Comey and Brennan and their gang like Dore and
Aaron Mate of Push Back. I wish one person would take the time to see this.
Check the handwriting...
View attachment 331603
No they don't lay it out because they want to entrap someone. Not all LE are like this, but they are out there for sure. True stories that made into movies and books are prevalent in this nation. The only reason the eye is on the Flynn case is due to the shady dealings of the FBI that was full of swamp creatures being directed by political forces that had an ax to grind. Information is coming to light, and it doesn't look good.Haha, when cops interview people they don’t always lay out everything they know, that would be, how you say.... fucking retarded! Part of questioning somebody is to see if they are giving you honest and reliable answers. Flynn didn’t do that. That’s not a trap that’s just catching somebody lyingThe FBI knew what the conversation was and lied that they did not know. Saying one word wrong was considered a 'lie.' Aside from that, it was not a crime for Flynn to talk to Kysliak and ask that the Obama sanctions (on Russia) be lifted. You seem to be taking a myopic view of what happened or may not have availed yourself of the whole story. In fact, your post smacks of Democrat propaganda if you ask me.Perjury trap?! That’s a joke right? So because the FBI knew Flynn had been talking to the Russians and then asked him if he had been talking to the Russians which he chose to lie about and say NO... this is a devious perjury trap? Come on man. You don’t expect people to take that argument seriously do you?First of all, every Presidential transition team has had conversations with foreign entities. Also, Flynn was not urged to get a lawyer, in fact, the FBI falsely claimed their questioning of him was no big deal. The FBI agents that interviewed Flynn said he (Flynn) did not give any indication of deception. Flynn was never told that by his first set of lawyers. It is not 'black and white' the FBI lied as well and set up a purjury-trap in order to compile more fake evidence on their now debunked Russia-Trump investigation.Of course they had a legitimate basis to interview Flynn. They were investigating Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Flynn was lying about contacts with the Russians.... it doesn’t get and more black and white. What aren’t you understanding?I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty. The fact that the FBI put pressure on him during an interrogation is exactly what cops do when interrogating suspects. Anybody want to give the Flynn defense another shot?
I have yet to hear anybody properly explain the theatrics surrounding the Flynn situation. He lied, was fired BY TRUMP for lying, was interviewed by the FBI, lied again, and then plead guilty.
Well, as Andrew McCarthy writes......
This goes to the point I’ve been pressing for years. There was no good-faith basis for an investigation of General Flynn. Under federal law, a false statement made to investigators is not actionable unless it is material. That means it must be pertinent to a matter that is properly under investigation. If the FBI did not have a legitimate investigative basis to interview Flynn, then that fact should have been disclosed as exculpatory information. It would have enabled his counsel to argue that any inaccurate statements he made were immaterial.
Interesting if legit.1) Since the FBI did not reveal it was a criminal inquiry and part of an investigation, THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION OF AN OATH. Flynn could have said the sky was pink and purple for all it mattered since he was NOT under oath in a 'friendly' conversation.Yeah intentionally lied when it was found out later that he didn't have too. He found out one thing though, and that is when dealing with a set up in which was hoping to find a bigger fish, him lying to throw off his assasins didn't do him any good in the long run, so yes it wasn't a good move for him, but thank God it all came out in the wash that the FBI went rogue.No, you can stop right there. He did not make a mistake. He intentionally lied. Please read up before commenting again.The fact he could not recall exactly what he said
2) That 'omission' also denied Flynn his Miranda rights which were not read to him prior to a criminal interview, and the case should have been thrown out over that alone.
3) Since Flynn is a member of the Trump team, the TDS lying ass corrupt Dimocrat partisans who love Beria blow it all off since it got a 'bad guy', i.e. and American patriot and war hero. They hate America just that much.
Flynn's defense lawyers at the time should be disbarred for gross incompetence.
Here is another interesting document...
View attachment 331608
Maybe someday someone will watch the best dissection and deconstruction of the case against the FBI
and how Trump was targeted for a political hit by the democrat party and their whole apparatus.
Dore is a progressive. But no one has taken on Comey and Brennan and their gang like Dore and
Aaron Mate of Push Back. I wish one person would take the time to see this.
Check the handwriting...
View attachment 331603
1) Since the FBI did not reveal it was a criminal inquiry and part of an investigation, THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION OF AN OATH. Flynn could have said the sky was pink and purple for all it mattered since he was NOT under oath in a 'friendly' conversation.Yeah intentionally lied when it was found out later that he didn't have too. He found out one thing though, and that is when dealing with a set up in which was hoping to find a bigger fish, him lying to throw off his assasins didn't do him any good in the long run, so yes it wasn't a good move for him, but thank God it all came out in the wash that the FBI went rogue.No, you can stop right there. He did not make a mistake. He intentionally lied. Please read up before commenting again.The fact he could not recall exactly what he said
2) That 'omission' also denied Flynn his Miranda rights which were not read to him prior to a criminal interview, and the case should have been thrown out over that alone.
3) Since Flynn is a member of the Trump team, the TDS lying ass corrupt Dimocrat partisans who love Beria blow it all off since it got a 'bad guy', i.e. and American patriot and war hero. They hate America just that much.
Flynn's defense lawyers at the time should be disbarred for gross incompetence.
Here is another interesting document...
View attachment 331608