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.
Or publicly RUINING and FINANCIALLY HOSING completely innocent people like Carter Page or Papadopolous??? You like that also??
How about having the world's most powerful domestic spy machine HIJACKED ILLEGALLY by the SAME FBI conspirators that hosed Flynn... You LIKE Domestic spying on citizens? You like it abused for PURELY political purposes against CITIZENS by the FBI and Intel Agencies?
Conspiracy to persecute the president? I call balony on that. Flynn lied. He did not have to. If anything, the conspiracy was by Trump & Co on the American people With their inherent disrespect for the rule of law.
ALL of this double cross on Flynn happened in the VERY FIRST DAYS of the Trump Admin.. The coup had NO "violations of the Rule of Law" to cite to JUSTIFY their traitorous actions NOR the SEVERE prosecutorial abuses of Gen Flynn.. OR the lying about him to Congress by Sally Yates..
IN FACT -- The LEGAL and appropriate Intel project at the FBI had concluded there WAS NO information that Flynn was "working was Russia" or compromised by Russia just THE DAY BEFORE Peter Strzok and Comey launched that ambush at the WH just FOUR DAYS into the Trump Admin -- to try and TRAP Flynn into a process crime.. BECAUSE THEY HAD NOTHING about "Russia" to pursue ANY legitimate investigation on..
It came out last week in papers PRIED by Flynn's new lawyer from the FBI -- that Strzok was advised FBI Intel was SHUTTING DOWN their investigation of Flynn -- And Strzok told them "NO -- hold it open" -- presumably because they NEEDED that excuse to get a Special council approved... He also told them "You CANT shut it down because the 7th floor is active on this"... Meaning the Cabal of Comey, McCabe, Weismann and Pete Strzok's lover lawyer for the 7th floor where the "top brass" work...
[Susan Rice] “President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book“.”
“The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would, “by the book.””
[Kathryn Ruemmler] The memorandum to file drafted by Ambassador Rice memorialized an important national security discussion between President Obama and the FBI Director and the Deputy Attorney General. President Obama and his national security team were justifiably concerned about potential risks to the Nation’s security from sharing highly classified information about Russia with certain members of the Trump transition team, particularly Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
There is no way to trick somebody into lying. People are either host or they aren’t when you’re being interview by the FBI you better be honest or else you’re going down. Why do you make up silly things like this “perjury trap” nonesense there is no such thing!!!No. Watch the video and find out for yourself.Wait hold up... you don’t think he lied?!
The FBI intentionally went in and ambushed Flynn with the intent of tricking him intowhy did Trump fire him? Why did the Feds arrest him?
a perjury trap as a way of taking Trump down.
It is very easy to do without a good lawyer standing by and James Comey himself
admitted he got Flynn to meet with two FBI agents informally without a lawyer, foolishly trusting the FBI
which he certainly doesn't now and knows better.
In other words Comey set Flynn up and led him straight into a trap and says as much (watch the video, don't take my word).
As far as Trump firing Flynn I'm sure it was done for political expediency. Trump will dump people in a blink
of the eye. If I can stress one thing again...watch the video from two anti Trump progressives. Learn something even if it hurts you.
Don't regurgitate leftist talking points and urban legends.
There is no way to trick somebody into lying. People are either host or they aren’t when you’re being interview by the FBI you better be honest or else you’re going down. Why do you make up silly things like this “perjury trap” nonesense there is no such thing!!!No. Watch the video and find out for yourself.Wait hold up... you don’t think he lied?!
The FBI intentionally went in and ambushed Flynn with the intent of tricking him intowhy did Trump fire him? Why did the Feds arrest him?
a perjury trap as a way of taking Trump down.
It is very easy to do without a good lawyer standing by and James Comey himself
admitted he got Flynn to meet with two FBI agents informally without a lawyer, foolishly trusting the FBI
which he certainly doesn't now and knows better.
In other words Comey set Flynn up and led him straight into a trap and says as much (watch the video, don't take my word).
As far as Trump firing Flynn I'm sure it was done for political expediency. Trump will dump people in a blink
of the eye. If I can stress one thing again...watch the video from two anti Trump progressives. Learn something even if it hurts you.
Don't regurgitate leftist talking points and urban legends.
I just read through this timeline and documents and as suspected left feeling like it was a total waste of time. What in the world do you think this shows?!Conspiracy to persecute the president? I call balony on that. Flynn lied. He did not have to. If anything, the conspiracy was by Trump & Co on the American people With their inherent disrespect for the rule of law.
ALL of this double cross on Flynn happened in the VERY FIRST DAYS of the Trump Admin.. The coup had NO "violations of the Rule of Law" to cite to JUSTIFY their traitorous actions NOR the SEVERE prosecutorial abuses of Gen Flynn.. OR the lying about him to Congress by Sally Yates..
IN FACT -- The LEGAL and appropriate Intel project at the FBI had concluded there WAS NO information that Flynn was "working was Russia" or compromised by Russia just THE DAY BEFORE Peter Strzok and Comey launched that ambush at the WH just FOUR DAYS into the Trump Admin -- to try and TRAP Flynn into a process crime.. BECAUSE THEY HAD NOTHING about "Russia" to pursue ANY legitimate investigation on..
It came out last week in papers PRIED by Flynn's new lawyer from the FBI -- that Strzok was advised FBI Intel was SHUTTING DOWN their investigation of Flynn -- And Strzok told them "NO -- hold it open" -- presumably because they NEEDED that excuse to get a Special council approved... He also told them "You CANT shut it down because the 7th floor is active on this"... Meaning the Cabal of Comey, McCabe, Weismann and Pete Strzok's lover lawyer for the 7th floor where the "top brass" work...
Starting at my post 848, showing documents of the scumbags discussion on how to entrap him:
View attachment 332148
I posted the released documents earlier showing this, the FBI was shutting down the investigation, Strzok reopened it into another direction that had ZERO legal justification.
Here is my big post 806, where internal documents inside the link as part of phase one, were posted:
♦ December 29, 2016 – Reacting to the sanctions, Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak calls incoming National Security Director Michael Flynn. The intelligence community is monitoring the call. (Mueller Report)
♦ December 31, 2016 – Kislyak Call #2 (Mueller Report)
♦ January 4, 2017 – The FBI Washington Field Office informs the intelligence community via an Electronic Communication, they are closing the 2016 Flynn investigation.
♦ January 4, 2017 – FBI Agent Peter Strzok says don’t close it.
♦ January 5, 2017 – James Comey goes to the White House: [Susan Rice Memo]
[Susan Rice] “President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book“.”
“The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would, “by the book.””
[Kathryn Ruemmler] The memorandum to file drafted by Ambassador Rice memorialized an important national security discussion between President Obama and the FBI Director and the Deputy Attorney General. President Obama and his national security team were justifiably concerned about potential risks to the Nation’s security from sharing highly classified information about Russia with certain members of the Trump transition team, particularly Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
January 6, 2017 – James Comey briefs President-elect Trump in Trump Tower on the Steele Dossier. [Comey Memos]
♦ January 7, 2017 – The intelligence community (Brennan, Clapper, Comey) released an “Intelligence Community Assessment” (ICA). The ICA took the ridiculous construct of the JAR and then overlaid a political narrative that Russia was trying to help Donald Trump.
♦ January 20, 2017 – Inauguration
=====
That was just Phase One...., go read Phase two where they then try to entrap him in some detail. I posted a part of it already in this post.
Leftists ignored it, I can understand why...…..
What is it you think I’m ignoring? Do you truly believe that Flynn forgot two conversations he had with Russia during all the crap that went on during this election?! In the heat of an FBI investigation and After Obama put sanctions on them for election interference?! And if Flynn was at all fuzzy about details then that’s all he had to say!!! But no he lied. It wasn’t a trap. It wasn’t Coerced... It was an intentional lie. Wake up!!There is no way to trick somebody into lying. People are either host or they aren’t when you’re being interview by the FBI you better be honest or else you’re going down. Why do you make up silly things like this “perjury trap” nonesense there is no such thing!!!No. Watch the video and find out for yourself.Wait hold up... you don’t think he lied?!
The FBI intentionally went in and ambushed Flynn with the intent of tricking him intowhy did Trump fire him? Why did the Feds arrest him?
a perjury trap as a way of taking Trump down.
It is very easy to do without a good lawyer standing by and James Comey himself
admitted he got Flynn to meet with two FBI agents informally without a lawyer, foolishly trusting the FBI
which he certainly doesn't now and knows better.
In other words Comey set Flynn up and led him straight into a trap and says as much (watch the video, don't take my word).
As far as Trump firing Flynn I'm sure it was done for political expediency. Trump will dump people in a blink
of the eye. If I can stress one thing again...watch the video from two anti Trump progressives. Learn something even if it hurts you.
Don't regurgitate leftist talking points and urban legends.
And you keep ignoring the agents 302's where they stipulate he wasn't lying.
Why?
They were investing Russians criminal interference in our election. Where have you been?!Haha, ok lets go with that... how was he coerced to lie?Oh BS...You're on here every day spouting DNC talking point propaganda. Who do you think you are fooling with the 'holier than thou' bullshit?I’m less interested in propaganda from either side and more interested in the simple reality of this case. Flynn lied about a pretty damn serious situation. I know it’s been pounded into your head that it was all a snowflake hoax so lying about it was no big deal but again that’s just propaganda at workLooks like you should watch the video I've already posted here. You asking questions from a place of ignorance.Let’s not do the broken record repeat thing ok? Ive already made the point that the FBI wasn’t going after Flynn for a crime. They knew he had contacts with the Russians... contacts that he had publicly lied about and was fired for.... they asked about the discussions and Flynn straight up lied to them about it. That’s a crime. Not a trap. Flynn could have just told the truth. He didn’t. Why are you making this complicated when it is not?!
I ya met said a word about Comey or trump. That’s you bringing them up. Try and stay on point.
And the video is the product of big time progressive leftists, so blather about "right wing talking points"
isn't helpful or pertinent.
Here is some 'simple reality' that just came to light. It's a quote from the FBI...."What is our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute," they obviously coerced him, did not read him his rights, pretended the interview was no big deal, and did not encourage him to have a lawyer.
Here is some more reality for you:
"Vice President Pence said Thursday he was "more inclined" to believe that former national security adviser Michael Flynn unintentionally misled him in early 2017 about his contacts with the Russian ambassador, an event that triggered Flynn's firing by the White House."
"Pence told reporters while traveling in Indiana that he was “deeply troubled” by new documents released in Flynn's criminal case, describing them as evidence of “investigative abuse.”
"If we get him to admit to breaking the Logan Act, give facts to DOJ & have them decide. Or, if he initially lies, then we present him [redacted] & he admits it, document for DOJ, & let them decide how to address it."
Maybe now you can stop beating your dead-horse of an argument.
are you saying that cops using somebodies crime of lying to try and get the truth is somehow inappropriate?!
Flynns call wasn’t illegal... telling Flynn they know the details of the call and getting him to elaborate about it would have been useless. They simply asked Flynn about it and he chose to lie. Leveraging Flynn’s lie to get details that Flynn would not voluntarily expose is how crimes are found. It happens with law enforcement all the time... squeeze the little fish to try and get the big fish. You act like cops trying to catch bad guys is somehow a bad thing. That’s their job!!
Flynns call wasn’t illegal... telling Flynn they know the details of the call and getting him to elaborate about it would have been useless.
Especially because there was no legitimate investigation.
Leveraging Flynn’s lie to get details that Flynn would not voluntarily expose is how crimes are found. It happens with law enforcement all the time... squeeze the little fish to try and get the big fish.
Cool story. What crime did the little fish commit? What crime did the big fish commit?
You act like cops trying to catch bad guys is somehow a bad thing.
It's not. When they're investigating a crime.
What crime were they investigating by talking to Flynn about his call?
Coyote Just LISTEN to this bragging bastard traitor ENTERTAINING TDSers like you about AMBUSHING Gen Flynn.,. He's just a HERO to them... NEEDS the credit at that point for GETTING a special counsel to investigate NOTHING that the FBI had on Russia Russia Russia...
This interview was shortly after he was fired and going out on "The Resistance Tour" to whip up the dittohead resisters about Russia..
Boils my blood at the level of ABUSE OF POWER that's here... Not the "abuse of power" you IMAGINED existed in the 1st weeks of the Trump Admin...
Watch IT -- and tell me this is funny or APPROPRIATE now that America KNOWS the FBI had NOTHING ON RUSSIA about Flynn and THEY knew this also...
I am no fan of Comey, particularly with what he did to Hilary, but 1 minute 32 second snippet isn’t going to make or break a case. It just feeds emotions.
You think I imagined abuse of power with Trump? I am just a TDS’er eh? That is your fall back when I point serious issues with Trump. Well, I know one thing for sure, I am not so far up Trump’s ass I am imitating a suppository.
In the history of bullshit hypocritical statements, you just skyrocketed to the top and lost my respect all at once.
What
The
Fuck
Comey confesses in 1:32 and you say it doesn't matter.
There is simply zero point in even trying to talk to someone who ignores. FUCKING GOD DAMN CONFESSION so she can keep partisan hate alive.
Like a security blanket, huh?
A 1:32 minute out of context snippet is an entire confession but an analysis from lawfare is fraudulent (I doubt you even bothered to read it).
You guys are looney tunes with no interest in discussion if it doesn’t support your pet conspiracy theory and make Trump’s ass shine.
keeping the partisan hate alive...good job dude, because that is what you are doing here when you can’t even entertain the idea of another point of view. You can drop your pretense of open mindedness, you are just another Trumpbot.
Nice leftist-Democrat talking points. You are quite the propagandist. Do they pay you?
can you challenge any of the legal points made in lawfare?
Your links are trash they don't go anywhere. Can you tell us why, Flynn was not read his Miranda rights before questioning? Can you tell us what crime the FBI was investigating?
Was Flynn under arrest? In custody?
Why did they not arrest him and put him in custody then? At least he would have been read his rights. Maybe......
Why would they When what they wanted was information or leverage for cooperation? That is typical law enforcement tactics.
You LIKE that right?? Like the FBI threatening to hunt down and prosecute HIS SON if he did not PLEAD guilty to a manufactured process crime?? You're a fan of that also - amirite???
I think you meant "investigating".....That being said, since when is an investigation grounds for indicting an interviewee?They were investing Russians criminal interference in our election. Where have you been?!Haha, ok lets go with that... how was he coerced to lie?Oh BS...You're on here every day spouting DNC talking point propaganda. Who do you think you are fooling with the 'holier than thou' bullshit?I’m less interested in propaganda from either side and more interested in the simple reality of this case. Flynn lied about a pretty damn serious situation. I know it’s been pounded into your head that it was all a snowflake hoax so lying about it was no big deal but again that’s just propaganda at workLooks like you should watch the video I've already posted here. You asking questions from a place of ignorance.Let’s not do the broken record repeat thing ok? Ive already made the point that the FBI wasn’t going after Flynn for a crime. They knew he had contacts with the Russians... contacts that he had publicly lied about and was fired for.... they asked about the discussions and Flynn straight up lied to them about it. That’s a crime. Not a trap. Flynn could have just told the truth. He didn’t. Why are you making this complicated when it is not?!
I ya met said a word about Comey or trump. That’s you bringing them up. Try and stay on point.
And the video is the product of big time progressive leftists, so blather about "right wing talking points"
isn't helpful or pertinent.
Here is some 'simple reality' that just came to light. It's a quote from the FBI...."What is our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute," they obviously coerced him, did not read him his rights, pretended the interview was no big deal, and did not encourage him to have a lawyer.
Here is some more reality for you:
"Vice President Pence said Thursday he was "more inclined" to believe that former national security adviser Michael Flynn unintentionally misled him in early 2017 about his contacts with the Russian ambassador, an event that triggered Flynn's firing by the White House."
"Pence told reporters while traveling in Indiana that he was “deeply troubled” by new documents released in Flynn's criminal case, describing them as evidence of “investigative abuse.”
"If we get him to admit to breaking the Logan Act, give facts to DOJ & have them decide. Or, if he initially lies, then we present him [redacted] & he admits it, document for DOJ, & let them decide how to address it."
Maybe now you can stop beating your dead-horse of an argument.
are you saying that cops using somebodies crime of lying to try and get the truth is somehow inappropriate?!
Flynns call wasn’t illegal... telling Flynn they know the details of the call and getting him to elaborate about it would have been useless. They simply asked Flynn about it and he chose to lie. Leveraging Flynn’s lie to get details that Flynn would not voluntarily expose is how crimes are found. It happens with law enforcement all the time... squeeze the little fish to try and get the big fish. You act like cops trying to catch bad guys is somehow a bad thing. That’s their job!!
Flynns call wasn’t illegal... telling Flynn they know the details of the call and getting him to elaborate about it would have been useless.
Especially because there was no legitimate investigation.
Leveraging Flynn’s lie to get details that Flynn would not voluntarily expose is how crimes are found. It happens with law enforcement all the time... squeeze the little fish to try and get the big fish.
Cool story. What crime did the little fish commit? What crime did the big fish commit?
You act like cops trying to catch bad guys is somehow a bad thing.
It's not. When they're investigating a crime.
What crime were they investigating by talking to Flynn about his call?
I think Flynn did not want to divulge classified discussions. After all, he was the Nationaql Security Advisor to Trump. Also, the FBI pretended they were not investigating him then used an archiac law (The Logan Act) to take him out. They wanted to get to Trump and used a fake Dossier and fake charges against Flynn to affect a coup against a duly elected American President. They should all hang IMO.What is it you think I’m ignoring? Do you truly believe that Flynn forgot two conversations he had with Russia during all the crap that went on during this election?! In the heat of an FBI investigation and After Obama put sanctions on them for election interference?! And if Flynn was at all fuzzy about details then that’s all he had to say!!! But no he lied. It wasn’t a trap. It wasn’t Coerced... It was an intentional lie. Wake up!!There is no way to trick somebody into lying. People are either host or they aren’t when you’re being interview by the FBI you better be honest or else you’re going down. Why do you make up silly things like this “perjury trap” nonesense there is no such thing!!!No. Watch the video and find out for yourself.Wait hold up... you don’t think he lied?!
The FBI intentionally went in and ambushed Flynn with the intent of tricking him intowhy did Trump fire him? Why did the Feds arrest him?
a perjury trap as a way of taking Trump down.
It is very easy to do without a good lawyer standing by and James Comey himself
admitted he got Flynn to meet with two FBI agents informally without a lawyer, foolishly trusting the FBI
which he certainly doesn't now and knows better.
In other words Comey set Flynn up and led him straight into a trap and says as much (watch the video, don't take my word).
As far as Trump firing Flynn I'm sure it was done for political expediency. Trump will dump people in a blink
of the eye. If I can stress one thing again...watch the video from two anti Trump progressives. Learn something even if it hurts you.
Don't regurgitate leftist talking points and urban legends.
And you keep ignoring the agents 302's where they stipulate he wasn't lying.
Why?
Coyote Just LISTEN to this bragging bastard traitor ENTERTAINING TDSers like you about AMBUSHING Gen Flynn.,. He's just a HERO to them... NEEDS the credit at that point for GETTING a special counsel to investigate NOTHING that the FBI had on Russia Russia Russia...
This interview was shortly after he was fired and going out on "The Resistance Tour" to whip up the dittohead resisters about Russia..
Boils my blood at the level of ABUSE OF POWER that's here... Not the "abuse of power" you IMAGINED existed in the 1st weeks of the Trump Admin...
Watch IT -- and tell me this is funny or APPROPRIATE now that America KNOWS the FBI had NOTHING ON RUSSIA about Flynn and THEY knew this also...
I am no fan of Comey, particularly with what he did to Hilary, but 1 minute 32 second snippet isn’t going to make or break a case. It just feeds emotions.
You think I imagined abuse of power with Trump? I am just a TDS’er eh? That is your fall back when I point serious issues with Trump. Well, I know one thing for sure, I am not so far up Trump’s ass I am imitating a suppository.
In the history of bullshit hypocritical statements, you just skyrocketed to the top and lost my respect all at once.
What
The
Fuck
Comey confesses in 1:32 and you say it doesn't matter.
There is simply zero point in even trying to talk to someone who ignores. FUCKING GOD DAMN CONFESSION so she can keep partisan hate alive.
Like a security blanket, huh?
A 1:32 minute out of context snippet is an entire confession but an analysis from lawfare is fraudulent (I doubt you even bothered to read it).
You guys are looney tunes with no interest in discussion if it doesn’t support your pet conspiracy theory and make Trump’s ass shine.
keeping the partisan hate alive...good job dude, because that is what you are doing here when you can’t even entertain the idea of another point of view. You can drop your pretense of open mindedness, you are just another Trumpbot.
Nice leftist-Democrat talking points. You are quite the propagandist. Do they pay you?
can you challenge any of the legal points made in lawfare?
Your links are trash they don't go anywhere. Can you tell us why, Flynn was not read his Miranda rights before questioning? Can you tell us what crime the FBI was investigating?
Was Flynn under arrest? In custody?
No, but the FBI acted like he was. That was a LIE...Get it now?
That is subjective and legally irrelevant. If he was not under arrest, and he is no dummy, he knows the law, they do not read you the Miranda. Your question is answered.
If he was not under arrest, and they did not read him his rights then they were abusing their authority in order to 'get' him and get him to lie, they admitted as much. What is it about that you can't seem to understand?
How exactly were they abusing their authority? Was he treated differently than others? He was someone who potentially had information on a larger potential crime and they needed a way to pressure him into cooperating. Again very standard. If they broke any laws, then what laws did they break?
Coyote Just LISTEN to this bragging bastard traitor ENTERTAINING TDSers like you about AMBUSHING Gen Flynn.,. He's just a HERO to them... NEEDS the credit at that point for GETTING a special counsel to investigate NOTHING that the FBI had on Russia Russia Russia...
This interview was shortly after he was fired and going out on "The Resistance Tour" to whip up the dittohead resisters about Russia..
Boils my blood at the level of ABUSE OF POWER that's here... Not the "abuse of power" you IMAGINED existed in the 1st weeks of the Trump Admin...
Watch IT -- and tell me this is funny or APPROPRIATE now that America KNOWS the FBI had NOTHING ON RUSSIA about Flynn and THEY knew this also...
I am no fan of Comey, particularly with what he did to Hilary, but 1 minute 32 second snippet isn’t going to make or break a case. It just feeds emotions.
You think I imagined abuse of power with Trump? I am just a TDS’er eh? That is your fall back when I point serious issues with Trump. Well, I know one thing for sure, I am not so far up Trump’s ass I am imitating a suppository.
In the history of bullshit hypocritical statements, you just skyrocketed to the top and lost my respect all at once.
What
The
Fuck
Comey confesses in 1:32 and you say it doesn't matter.
There is simply zero point in even trying to talk to someone who ignores. FUCKING GOD DAMN CONFESSION so she can keep partisan hate alive.
Like a security blanket, huh?
A 1:32 minute out of context snippet is an entire confession but an analysis from lawfare is fraudulent (I doubt you even bothered to read it).
You guys are looney tunes with no interest in discussion if it doesn’t support your pet conspiracy theory and make Trump’s ass shine.
keeping the partisan hate alive...good job dude, because that is what you are doing here when you can’t even entertain the idea of another point of view. You can drop your pretense of open mindedness, you are just another Trumpbot.
Nice leftist-Democrat talking points. You are quite the propagandist. Do they pay you?
can you challenge any of the legal points made in lawfare?
Why bother you'd cry foul and out of context.
Or you call leftist-Democrat talking points.
So you clearly did not bother to read it and won’t bother to refute its points. No wonder we are reduced to talking points and bumper sticker insults.
Coyote Just LISTEN to this bragging bastard traitor ENTERTAINING TDSers like you about AMBUSHING Gen Flynn.,. He's just a HERO to them... NEEDS the credit at that point for GETTING a special counsel to investigate NOTHING that the FBI had on Russia Russia Russia...
This interview was shortly after he was fired and going out on "The Resistance Tour" to whip up the dittohead resisters about Russia..
Boils my blood at the level of ABUSE OF POWER that's here... Not the "abuse of power" you IMAGINED existed in the 1st weeks of the Trump Admin...
Watch IT -- and tell me this is funny or APPROPRIATE now that America KNOWS the FBI had NOTHING ON RUSSIA about Flynn and THEY knew this also...
I am no fan of Comey, particularly with what he did to Hilary, but 1 minute 32 second snippet isn’t going to make or break a case. It just feeds emotions.
You think I imagined abuse of power with Trump? I am just a TDS’er eh? That is your fall back when I point serious issues with Trump. Well, I know one thing for sure, I am not so far up Trump’s ass I am imitating a suppository.
In the history of bullshit hypocritical statements, you just skyrocketed to the top and lost my respect all at once.
What
The
Fuck
Comey confesses in 1:32 and you say it doesn't matter.
There is simply zero point in even trying to talk to someone who ignores. FUCKING GOD DAMN CONFESSION so she can keep partisan hate alive.
Like a security blanket, huh?
A 1:32 minute out of context snippet is an entire confession but an analysis from lawfare is fraudulent (I doubt you even bothered to read it).
You guys are looney tunes with no interest in discussion if it doesn’t support your pet conspiracy theory and make Trump’s ass shine.
keeping the partisan hate alive...good job dude, because that is what you are doing here when you can’t even entertain the idea of another point of view. You can drop your pretense of open mindedness, you are just another Trumpbot.
Out of context now.
Then please, put the context around it. Make this unbiased where comey himself said he'd not do it to Bush or Clinton.
And the entire fucking impeachment shit was FUCKING OUT OF Context yet you supported it, didn't you?
Respect 0.
And I'm not talking about Trump. I'm talking about what comey said but HERE YOU FUCKING GO BUT BUT BUT THIS GUY!!!!! you know, the tactic you hate done to you?
But I'm sure you don't care I'm the bad guy for wanting all to stop the stupid games and play by the same rules.
Keep proving me correct that your own hate is a security blanket you refuse to let go of.
I get that Trump can do no wrong in your eyes. And now you bring up impeachment. Because everything, EVERYTHING is about hating Trump in your eyes. Nothing to do with his actions or policies, God no. That is your world. The paranoid world of Trump In which he and his supporters carry no responsibilities for their actions. It’s yours. You created it. I think my eyes have finally been opened. One can try very hard to see both sides...but sometimes that leads to blindness, because not everything is equivalent. You can keep your Trumplandia, and convince yourself that every dissent and criticism is just because they hate Trump.
But I do like logic. And context matters. You have a snippet of Comey. What law did he break?
I provided an in-depth analysis via lawfare (and no, not anyone can write it). Did you bother to read it? What points do you challenge?
you
I'm not the one who keeps bringing up Trump in a convo about comey and flynn.
Distraction at its finest cause you CANNOT PUT WHAT COMEY SAID INTO CONTEXT.
Or do that and shut me up.
That simple.
But again, who keeps bringing up Trump and goes into an emotional blind rage of deflection?
Aroooooo that's you.
And I won't waste my time Slade Jr. You will ignore what you don't like and rage into deflections. There is no debate in any of this. Just bitching.
You.
I didn’t bring Trump up, others did.
Emotional insurance.Flynn did not lie, if so what was the lie?Conspiracy to persecute the president? I call balony on that. Flynn lied. He did not have to. If anything, the conspiracy was by Trump & Co on the American people With their inherent disrespect for the rule of law.
He thought he was engaged in a friendly conversation, and had not brought any notes with him, or the lawyer he was tricked out of with FBI lies.
It amazes me that you insist on focusing on the Flynn 'lie' but ignore the FBI lies, the lack of Miranda rights, the fact that it was not announced to be an FBI investigative interview and thus Flynn was NEVEr obligated to tell them the truth about anything, nor liable for prosecution if he did not.
The FBI is not our Lord and Masters. They work for US, and have to tell us if their question involve a criminal investigation of us, or it doesnt count.
Coyote Just LISTEN to this bragging bastard traitor ENTERTAINING TDSers like you about AMBUSHING Gen Flynn.,. He's just a HERO to them... NEEDS the credit at that point for GETTING a special counsel to investigate NOTHING that the FBI had on Russia Russia Russia...
This interview was shortly after he was fired and going out on "The Resistance Tour" to whip up the dittohead resisters about Russia..
Boils my blood at the level of ABUSE OF POWER that's here... Not the "abuse of power" you IMAGINED existed in the 1st weeks of the Trump Admin...
Watch IT -- and tell me this is funny or APPROPRIATE now that America KNOWS the FBI had NOTHING ON RUSSIA about Flynn and THEY knew this also...
I am no fan of Comey, particularly with what he did to Hilary, but 1 minute 32 second snippet isn’t going to make or break a case. It just feeds emotions.
You think I imagined abuse of power with Trump? I am just a TDS’er eh? That is your fall back when I point serious issues with Trump. Well, I know one thing for sure, I am not so far up Trump’s ass I am imitating a suppository.
In the history of bullshit hypocritical statements, you just skyrocketed to the top and lost my respect all at once.
What
The
Fuck
Comey confesses in 1:32 and you say it doesn't matter.
There is simply zero point in even trying to talk to someone who ignores. FUCKING GOD DAMN CONFESSION so she can keep partisan hate alive.
Like a security blanket, huh?
A 1:32 minute out of context snippet is an entire confession but an analysis from lawfare is fraudulent (I doubt you even bothered to read it).
You guys are looney tunes with no interest in discussion if it doesn’t support your pet conspiracy theory and make Trump’s ass shine.
keeping the partisan hate alive...good job dude, because that is what you are doing here when you can’t even entertain the idea of another point of view. You can drop your pretense of open mindedness, you are just another Trumpbot.
Nice leftist-Democrat talking points. You are quite the propagandist. Do they pay you?
can you challenge any of the legal points made in lawfare?
Your links are trash they don't go anywhere. Can you tell us why, Flynn was not read his Miranda rights before questioning? Can you tell us what crime the FBI was investigating?
Was Flynn under arrest? In custody?
Why did they not arrest him and put him in custody then? At least he would have been read his rights. Maybe......
Why would they When what they wanted was information or leverage for cooperation? That is typical law enforcement tactics.
It is a typical law enforcement tactic when they are investigating a CRIME!! They were not doing that. A transition team member talking to a foreign representative is NOT a crime.
When they are investigating a potential crime. And yes, it can be a crime.
What?! A "potential" crime? Oh brother.....You are willing to lose your rights because someone thinks you committed a "potential crime?" What kind of idiocy is that? When was the last time any Presidential transition member was prosecuted for talking to a foreign representative? Answer this, when Hillary was interviewed she had a room full of lawyers and was told the consequences if she lied. Why was it different for Flynn?
LOLOLStay tuned....the actual facts (not the contrived facts) are going to be exposed, and you're going to be butthurt.LOLOLFlynn wasn't a 'bad guy' they made him one based on the false Russia investigation. Who was the 'big fish?'Haha, ok lets go with that... how was he coerced to lie?Oh BS...You're on here every day spouting DNC talking point propaganda. Who do you think you are fooling with the 'holier than thou' bullshit?I’m less interested in propaganda from either side and more interested in the simple reality of this case. Flynn lied about a pretty damn serious situation. I know it’s been pounded into your head that it was all a snowflake hoax so lying about it was no big deal but again that’s just propaganda at workLooks like you should watch the video I've already posted here. You asking questions from a place of ignorance.Let’s not do the broken record repeat thing ok? Ive already made the point that the FBI wasn’t going after Flynn for a crime. They knew he had contacts with the Russians... contacts that he had publicly lied about and was fired for.... they asked about the discussions and Flynn straight up lied to them about it. That’s a crime. Not a trap. Flynn could have just told the truth. He didn’t. Why are you making this complicated when it is not?!
I ya met said a word about Comey or trump. That’s you bringing them up. Try and stay on point.
And the video is the product of big time progressive leftists, so blather about "right wing talking points"
isn't helpful or pertinent.
Here is some 'simple reality' that just came to light. It's a quote from the FBI...."What is our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute," they obviously coerced him, did not read him his rights, pretended the interview was no big deal, and did not encourage him to have a lawyer.
Here is some more reality for you:
"Vice President Pence said Thursday he was "more inclined" to believe that former national security adviser Michael Flynn unintentionally misled him in early 2017 about his contacts with the Russian ambassador, an event that triggered Flynn's firing by the White House."
"Pence told reporters while traveling in Indiana that he was “deeply troubled” by new documents released in Flynn's criminal case, describing them as evidence of “investigative abuse.”
"If we get him to admit to breaking the Logan Act, give facts to DOJ & have them decide. Or, if he initially lies, then we present him [redacted] & he admits it, document for DOJ, & let them decide how to address it."
Maybe now you can stop beating your dead-horse of an argument.
are you saying that cops using somebodies crime of lying to try and get the truth is somehow inappropriate?!
Flynns call wasn’t illegal... telling Flynn they know the details of the call and getting him to elaborate about it would have been useless. They simply asked Flynn about it and he chose to lie. Leveraging Flynn’s lie to get details that Flynn would not voluntarily expose is how crimes are found. It happens with law enforcement all the time... squeeze the little fish to try and get the big fish. You act like cops trying to catch bad guys is somehow a bad thing. That’s their job!!
He admitted he lied. Not only did he plead guilty, but he reaffirmed his guilt when he rejected the judge's offer to withdraw his guilty plea.
He lied. Deal with it.
He was involved with Russia, ya putz. He was discussing the easing the sanctions with Sergey Kislyak.That is pretty pathetic since the stated reason for firing Flynn was lying to the VP.Pence saying that he now thinks Flynn unintentionally misled him has got to be one of the most pathetic excuses I’ve heard in a while. It literally made me laugh out loud when I first heard it. Are you really taking that seriously?!Oh BS...You're on here every day spouting DNC talking point propaganda. Who do you think you are fooling with the 'holier than thou' bullshit?I’m less interested in propaganda from either side and more interested in the simple reality of this case. Flynn lied about a pretty damn serious situation. I know it’s been pounded into your head that it was all a snowflake hoax so lying about it was no big deal but again that’s just propaganda at workLooks like you should watch the video I've already posted here. You asking questions from a place of ignorance.Let’s not do the broken record repeat thing ok? Ive already made the point that the FBI wasn’t going after Flynn for a crime. They knew he had contacts with the Russians... contacts that he had publicly lied about and was fired for.... they asked about the discussions and Flynn straight up lied to them about it. That’s a crime. Not a trap. Flynn could have just told the truth. He didn’t. Why are you making this complicated when it is not?!
I ya met said a word about Comey or trump. That’s you bringing them up. Try and stay on point.
And the video is the product of big time progressive leftists, so blather about "right wing talking points"
isn't helpful or pertinent.
Here is some 'simple reality' that just came to light. It's a quote from the FBI...."What is our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute," they obviously coerced him, did not read him his rights, pretended the interview was no big deal, and did not encourage him to have a lawyer.
Here is some more reality for you:
"Vice President Pence said Thursday he was "more inclined" to believe that former national security adviser Michael Flynn unintentionally misled him in early 2017 about his contacts with the Russian ambassador, an event that triggered Flynn's firing by the White House."
"Pence told reporters while traveling in Indiana that he was “deeply troubled” by new documents released in Flynn's criminal case, describing them as evidence of “investigative abuse.”
"If we get him to admit to breaking the Logan Act, give facts to DOJ & have them decide. Or, if he initially lies, then we present him [redacted] & he admits it, document for DOJ, & let them decide how to address it."
Maybe now you can stop beating your dead-horse of an argument.
a Jellyfish has a stronger spine than Pence
But then, this is the Administration of Alternative Facts: Lying brought to an entirely new level.
Why Flynn was fired is that Sally Yates went to WH with phony information on Flynn.. She WAS the "next in line" by succession for AG and was ACTING AG when she MISREPRESENTED Michael Flynn to the Prez and VP Pence as being "Compromised by Russia".. After Comey was fired, Yates did a big public show that SHE was now in charge in spite of the fact that Trump was still looking at candidates for AG. When it was found out that Yates HAD BEEN IN ON the plan to REMOVE Flynn as NSAdvisor, -- HER ASS got summarily fired... She then CONTINUED to lie about Flynn, EVEN UNDER OATH to Congress.. Did that TWICE AFTER she was fired.
She should be stripped of pension at the LEAST for participating in this whole coup attempt.
SHE was part of conspiracy to persecute the President and REMOVE Flynn at all costs.. Because Flynn was one of the nation's top Intel people and could protect the Prez from the assault his Admin was under..
Here's one clue -- the rest are out there...
Sally Yates, others were alarmed about FBI treatment of Mike Flynn
A little-noticed letter from special counsel Robert Mueller’s office divulges Obama DOJ concerns about FBI treatment of ex-Trump national security adviser. ~John Solomon “Former acting Attorney General Sally Yates and other senior Obama-era Justice Department officials told the Russia special...www.independentsentinel.com
I gave you a link to show where Flynn was arguing that in 2018 and how the judge rejected it then. I can't help that you lack reading fundamentals.It was already addressed in court...That's old news. Flynn tried that excuse back in 2018. It was reviewed by the court and adjudicated and Flynn lost.Oh? What exculpatory evidence would that be?While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).Once again, what's done in the dark is coming to the light.
The FBI is being exposed as a corrupt entity of the government at the highest level.
Handwritten notes from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that had been inappropriately withheld from Flynn’s defense team for years show that a key goal of the agents investigating Flynn was “to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired.”
In the handwritten FBI notes, the note-taker, whose identity was not made clear in the document production, wrote that an alternate goal is to “get [Flynn] to admit breaking the Logan Act,” a reference to a 1799 law restricting communications between private citizens and foreign governments.
The FBI notes also show that the author of the document had misgivings about the FBI’s conduct in interviewing Flynn.
“I agreed yesterday that we shouldn’t show Flynn [REDACTED] if he didn’t admit,” the FBI author wrote. “I thought [about] it last night, [and] I believe we should rethink this.”
“We regularly show subjects evidence, with the goal of getting them to admit wrongdoing,” the notes said. “I don’t see how getting someone to admit their wrongdoing is going easy on him.”
Explosive New Flynn Documents Show FBI Goal Was To 'Get Him Fired'
Newly disclosed handwritten documents in the Michael Flynn case show that the stated goal of the FBI in interviewing Flynn was to 'get him fired.'thefederalist.com
“I agreed yesterday that we shouldn’t show Flynn [REDACTED] if he didn’t admit” but “I thought about it last night and I believe we should rethink this,” the FBI official wrote. “What is our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”
‘Truth/Admission or to get him to lie’?: Notes show FBI discussed possible Michael Flynn prosecution before interview - Washington Examiner
Top FBI officials discussed the possibility of prosecuting retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn for lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians as agents planned how to conduct their interview of the Trump national security adviser, newly unsealed notes show. The records, unsealed through a...www.washingtonexaminer.com
One of Obama's long list of legacies, no doubt.
I'll be looking for this on CNN.
The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).
Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).
648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct
This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.www.justice.gov
The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice."
Like hiding exculpatory evidence?
You know, the agents notes. It's been in all the papers.
Justice Department provides Flynn's attorneys with documents from Barr's re-examination | CNN Politics
The Justice Department said Friday it shared with Michael Flynn's lawyers a number of documents uncovered in a review ordered by Attorney General William Barr, raising the prospect that the department now believes potentially exculpatory information wasn't turned over as required before the...www.cnn.com
Flynn tried that excuse back in 2018. It was reviewed by the court and adjudicated and Flynn lost.
He lost before the hidden, exculpatory evidence was turned over.
Michael Flynn's lawyers offered 3 different versions of the same story as it became clear he could face significant jail time
Michael Flynn's lawyers were forced to change their story surrounding Flynn's guilty plea when pressed during a sentencing hearing.www.businessinsider.sg
It was already addressed in court...
The exculpatory eveidence just uncovered in the last month was already addressed in court? When?
Flynn lied to the FBI. That's a crime. A crime for which he pled guilty because he is guilty.Nothing makes a case when you refuse to look at it and educate yourself.I recommend a laxative to unclog your malfunctioning executive functions. One and a half minutes of that asshat Comey does not a case make,
You have all the intellectual honesty and integrity of a slug trail on the sidewalk. Were you on O.J's jury by any
chance?
Edits to the 302 were raised in court by Flynn 2 years ago. Judge Sullivan rejected they were material last year.Oh? What exculpatory evidence would that be?While the essence of the entrapment defense is the defendant's lack of predisposition to commit the offense, the "defense" of outrageous government conduct presupposes predisposition but seeks dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the conduct of law enforcement agents was "so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial process to obtain a conviction." United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973). Thus, the outrageous government conduct defense is not really a defense at all. Rather, it is a claim that the institution of the prosecution suffers from a purely legal defect; as such, the claim is waived unless raised prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Henderson-Durand, 985 F.2d 970, 973 & n. 5 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 (1993); United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 1990); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F.2d 1093, 1099 (2d Cir. 1980).Once again, what's done in the dark is coming to the light.
The FBI is being exposed as a corrupt entity of the government at the highest level.
Handwritten notes from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that had been inappropriately withheld from Flynn’s defense team for years show that a key goal of the agents investigating Flynn was “to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired.”
In the handwritten FBI notes, the note-taker, whose identity was not made clear in the document production, wrote that an alternate goal is to “get [Flynn] to admit breaking the Logan Act,” a reference to a 1799 law restricting communications between private citizens and foreign governments.
The FBI notes also show that the author of the document had misgivings about the FBI’s conduct in interviewing Flynn.
“I agreed yesterday that we shouldn’t show Flynn [REDACTED] if he didn’t admit,” the FBI author wrote. “I thought [about] it last night, [and] I believe we should rethink this.”
“We regularly show subjects evidence, with the goal of getting them to admit wrongdoing,” the notes said. “I don’t see how getting someone to admit their wrongdoing is going easy on him.”
Explosive New Flynn Documents Show FBI Goal Was To 'Get Him Fired'
Newly disclosed handwritten documents in the Michael Flynn case show that the stated goal of the FBI in interviewing Flynn was to 'get him fired.'
“I agreed yesterday that we shouldn’t show Flynn [REDACTED] if he didn’t admit” but “I thought about it last night and I believe we should rethink this,” the FBI official wrote. “What is our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”
‘Truth/Admission or to get him to lie’?: Notes show FBI discussed possible Michael Flynn prosecution before interview - Washington Examiner
Top FBI officials discussed the possibility of prosecuting retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn for lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians as agents planned how to conduct their interview of the Trump national security adviser, newly unsealed notes show. The records, unsealed through a...
One of Obama's long list of legacies, no doubt.
I'll be looking for this on CNN.
The Supreme Court has never held that the government's mere use of undercover agents or informants, or the use of deception by them, gives rise to a due process violation, although in Russell it left open that possibility. The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice." Id. at 432. No court of appeals has held that a predisposed defendant may establish a due process violation simply because he purportedly was induced to commit the crime by an undercover agent or informant. See, e.g., United States v. Pedraza, 27 F.3d 1515, 1521 (10th Cir.) (not outrageous for government "to infiltrate an ongoing criminal enterprise, or to induce a defendant to repeat, continue, or even expand criminal activity."), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 347 (1994).
Defendants who claim to be victims of outrageous government conduct sometimes also argue that the district court should dismiss the indictment in the exercise of its supervisory power. In the absence of a due process violation, however, a district court has no authority to dismiss an indictment on this basis. See, e.g., United States v. Simpson, 927 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1991).
648. Entrapment—Outrageous Government Conduct
This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about the archive site.
The requisite level of outrageousness could be reached only where government conduct is so fundamentally unfair as to be "shocking to the universal sense of justice."
Like hiding exculpatory evidence?
The 302's that were fraudulently modified, for one. I know that's hard for a extremist twerp, like you, but that would certainly qualify. Don't you?
After all the agents who did it can actually be indicted for doing that.
Ignore the evidence you can't bring yourself to watch and just keep up your denials.What is it you think I’m ignoring? Do you truly believe that Flynn forgot two conversations he had with Russia during all the crap that went on during this election?! In the heat of an FBI investigation and After Obama put sanctions on them for election interference?! And if Flynn was at all fuzzy about details then that’s all he had to say!!! But no he lied. It wasn’t a trap. It wasn’t Coerced... It was an intentional lie. Wake up
