Looks Like the Trump Admin is Bringing Dark Secrets to The Light

[Coyote]

Once the house of cards starts to fall down there is no way of knowing who will go down next.
We only can say the corrupt Obama crime syndicate is on red alert right now.

I’ve heard this for years and... nothing

Any day now....

(it pisses them off that try as they might they have not been able to pin a significant scandal on him...now the Trump administration...)

 

[Coyote]

Wow, Barr just dropped the case. Talk about the dirty dirty swamp. How embarrassing for our government

Yeah, when shown overwhelming evidence of FBI criminal conduct the DOJ only has one option, and that is to drop all charges.

That's what the RULE OF LAW, demands.

No, when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested... when trying to cover for a liar the charges get dropped... isn’t that what y’all said about Comey and Clinton?

when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested...

Exactly. If there was any evidence of criminal conduct in the phone call, he should have been arrested.

Lying to the FBI is a crime.

 

[Coyote]

You make a lot of ASSumptions about liberals none of which are right unless you dig into conspiracy theory propaganda.

What's funny is that you would support foreign countries attempting to interfere in our elections.

What's sad is you would make this preposterous charge in order to prop up your absurd claims.
Desperate people make desperate claims.

What preposterous charge? That Russia was actively trying to interfere in elections, not only in the US but among our allies?

Russian interference was an excuse to try to get rid of Trump.

Russian interference was A reality that was uncovered by all of our intel agencies including Trumps guys.

Russian interference was A reality

Is there anything worse than a weaponized meme?

minimize it all you want but Trumps own intel directors have confirmed it and spoken out to its seriousness

If Clinton had won...would they be singing the same tune? I doubt it. I don't care who won the election - what the Russians are doing in interference, not just on us - should be taken seriously.

 

[Coyote]

Wow, Barr just dropped the case. Talk about the dirty dirty swamp. How embarrassing for our government

Just goes to show the depth of corruption this administration has created.

This administration is rooting out corruption.

This admin is more corrupt than every admin since Nixon

Don't sugar coat it, Obama's administration was more corrupt than Nixon.

And people claim we're the "haters"....

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

And people claim we're the "haters"....

And rightly so. I wish I had a dime for every time Trump was called Hitler or Putin's puppet.

 

[Slade3200]

And people claim we're the "haters"....

And rightly so. I wish I had a dime for every time Trump was called Hitler or Putin's puppet.

Would you pay a dime for every derogatory statement you’ve made about the Left?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You make a lot of ASSumptions about liberals none of which are right unless you dig into conspiracy theory propaganda.

What's funny is that you would support foreign countries attempting to interfere in our elections.

What's sad is you would make this preposterous charge in order to prop up your absurd claims.
Desperate people make desperate claims.

What preposterous charge? That Russia was actively trying to interfere in elections, not only in the US but among our allies?

Russian interference was an excuse to try to get rid of Trump.

Russian interference was A reality that was uncovered by all of our intel agencies including Trumps guys.

Russian interference was A reality

Is there anything worse than a weaponized meme?

minimize it all you want but Trumps own intel directors have confirmed it and spoken out to its seriousness

Trumps own intel directors have confirmed it

I know!

It's awful when stupid Dem voters are tricked into voting for Trump.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

the only thing different huh? A fictional Deep State behind a fictional coup....but then...you aren't exactly blinded by logic either.

There is nothing "fictional" about the charge of Russian collusion that the democrats tried to use to ride Trump out of office with but the Russian collusion itself. There was none. None that Robert Mueller would certify, anyway.
The people still obsessed with this matter think they know better than that, however. Zealots always do.

The investigation, imo, was 100% merited. There was enough evidence for sufficient concern. Investigations don't start out with a conclusion, they gather evidence and build from that. The Mueller investigation was thorough, professional, non-partisan and left no stone unturned. I'm satisfied. I do want to see the report released. There was no evidence of criminal conspiracy, but obstruction was another matter. There is nothing fictional about any of that.

But I'm sure deluded leftists believe in the myth of Russian collusion in the same way that residents of mental institutions believe that cats talk to them or fairies and elves come and visit every night when the lights go out.

And deluded rightists will believe it was all a hoax-spawned witch-hunt and ignore the larger implications of it, just as they believe everyone is out to get Trump.

And given your open disdain for Trump as a "cult" are you being unbiased or letting how you feel about Trump allow you to treat him differently? We've already established you are OK treating people differently.

Which is, why I establish points, and not chase rabbits.

The problem with your reasoning is you ignore the points you don't like, including that Mueller was a highly respected prosecutor, that even Trump praised. He was a Republican (as if that would make any difference - people can belong to a political party and do a professional job even though rightists don't seem to believe that). I respect Mueller and I respect the job he did. I respect the findings of our own intelligence and that of other nations that reported Russian attempts to influence elections in multiple countries.

How about you? Are you allowing your bias for Trump to affect the way you view this investigation.

Hell, since you did it already, I'll throw in my own gratuitous Hilary - how about, given your well known antipathy towards her...you think that might influenced your view on the investigation done on her? Comey really screwed her after all.

I'm stopping at your first sentence as this is what you have done the entire thread.

But this is funny n caught my eye...i'm Trump neutral but you keep assigning me more. Why is that? Ignoring facts you don't like?

You just proved my point while struggling to make sense of your own. That has to hurt.

That dog don't hunt. Your posting history and positions you tend to take really don't support that.

Even here. You refuse to consider that there could have been a good reason to investigate Trump.

If there was a good reason to investigate you'd not have the fbi falsifying reports to FISA and using fictional dossiers.

Since this has come up and to see a lack of proper procedures and protocol being followed in the Flynn prosecution, It confounds me how it has gotten this far....
Not Mirandizing Flynn once they decided to charge him, much less possibly charge him with a crime is in and of itself criminal. I don't give a flying flip about how "affable" the agents wanted him to be, the fact that this one simple procedure wasn't done when it should have been is at the least immoral of any investigating authority, and at worst criminal in and of itself. Coming from the overall "Top Cop" agency should concern each and every one of us.... regardless of political affiliation.
Comey's brag about not following procedures is another dirty deed in all of this as well. Policies and Procedures do not change just because a new person steps in..... It doesn't matter if it's military, business nor government. Policies and Procedures are set and adhered to until they are formally changed by those capable of making those changes... and for any changes to take place is a process, until that process is done, then te status quo is intact. To deviate from that is flat out wrong.
There was a statement made about Hillary Clinton's treatment by Comey..... Talk about your apples and oranges... Hillary Clinton was assessed by the FBI to have actually committed a crime, and it kept coming back around and around due to several different reason... yet Comey admits, yes it was wrong but he would not charge her.... since when does the FBI get to decide who and who doesn't get sent up? isn't that the job of the Attorney General??? Yet Comey "really screwed her." I ask you this, who would you have the FBI treat you like? Hillary, or Flynn?

Let's see your evidence Flynn was not read his Miranda rights when he was taken into custody....

Into custody... I have no doubt he was.... Then.
However, when under investigation, suspicion, or there is the slightest possibility the person you are "having a conversation" with could be implicated in any way, shape, form or fashion, it is inherent upon the investigator to mirandize that individual.
I've done enough 15-6 investigations to know this, so why would seasoned FBI agents do otherwise? The answer to that question, is to make things fit their particular agenda.
It really is as simple as that.
Now, if you will excuse me the fish are biting...

The agenda of catching bad guys? How dare they!!!
Two Points...
1.Flynn was told that he could have an attorney present prior to the interview.

2. Flynn acknowledged in court that he had not been tricked by the FBI by not being told he could not lie, and that he knew lying to FBI agents was a federal crime.

Flynn's own words are damning.

yet comeys saying he did shit he'd not do to anyone else isn't.

got it.

Comey's words show he was reckless and disregarded proper procedures. That's not illegal, just wrong. Flynn lied to the FBI. That IS a crime. Contrary to what was claimed - he was told he could have a lawyer. He said he wasn't tricked.

yet if they have no regard for process and are willing to go around them to suit their end goal, you don't give a shit. you like the end goal.

i don't care who they do this to - it would be wrong. if they did it to you, me, slade, hillard, ANY OF US. the action is wrong and i don't care who it's against.

the minute you allow it for YOUR side, you get the divide we have today. so congrats. you play a huge role in your own frustrations.

You make a lot of ASSumptions.

I was and I am still seriously concerned about Russian attempts to influence elections - that's the elephant in the room that people like you avoid seeing or try to downplay. That is the real issue.

To that end - I fully supported the Mueller investigation - there was just too much obstruction, lies, and political games from both sides to not have an impartial professional NON PARTISAN investigation. And Mueller, by the way, was a Republican.

I don't have an "end goal" accept to make sure our electoral integrity and the public trust in our elections is preserved, and that (hopefully) we vote Trump out of office. Did you catch that bit? VOTE him out.

Going around the normal process is reckless - when police do it, it means what they find might not hold up in court. It indicates a person willing to bend or break rules. As a comparison - Comey did indeed go around normal process when he announced, days before the election, that he was reopening an investigation on Hilary (and that might have cost her the election, no way to ever know for sure). He bucked his DoJ bosses. (where is your outrage?) So he hasn't done this just to one side. He has shown himself to be willing to bend rules and to be a showboater. Not good qualities in his position.

Points to consider:
Did he do anything illegal? What laws did he break?

Did Flynn break the law? Yes. He did. And he knew it and knew what the laws were. Regardless of what process Comey circumvented - Flynn still was offered a lawyer, and he knew full well that lying to the FBI was a crime. And he stated he wasn't tricked. You can't just sweep that under the rug.

Comey's already fired but, I suspect if he weren't - he would be now - but it doesn't alter what Flynn did unless laws or rules were broken that prohibited the use of that interview. I think that is up to the courts to determine and they haven't been particularly sympathetic to Flynn so far. I'm fine with what the courts determine because that is their job.

Very well said. You win

Flynn was told he did not need lawyer. That was a fucking lie.

thats not what he was told you’re making that up.

See my former post with a link:

"Comey went on to say that although he took exception to the congressman’s characterization of McCabe’s statement as discouraging, he believed that it was written accurately. He said he had meant that it would be quicker to just speak privately with the agents."


“So I would read it as encouraging him to meet with the agents without White House Counsel present,” Comey said."

Yes, comey told him he could have WH counsel but, the interview was sold as a friendly conversation a Flynn was subsequently told he did not need a lawyer that the interview would be quicker.

And that is what law enforcement typically does. Flynn should know that. If you have a problem with it - you will need to retry a shitload of cases.

The FBI does not try to create crimes typically but they did in Flynn's case.

Lying to FBI agents is not a made up crime

McCabe and Storzk pretended they were welcoming Flynn as new National Security guy. As such, Flynn would have known about the coup so they had to set him up to lie. They pretended to have a casual conversation and when Flynn made misstatements in that casual conversation they sprung on him.

Yet they offered him the invite to bring council and he said in court that he was not tricked and that he lied. Sorry man, you can’t spin beyond that

Yet they offered him the invite to bring council and he said in court that he was not tricked and that he lied.

How much of his statement in court was coerced?

His statements are his statements. Your arguments are so pathetic. When he lies it is because the Obama FBI tricked him. When he confesses it’s because he was coerced. Give me a break... you’re just trolling right? There’s no way you actually believe that weak ass narrative, right?

His statements are his statements.

Even when they're coerced.

When he lies it is because the Obama FBI tricked him.

Any lie was not material.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

You're the biggest fruitcake on this site. The fact you are a moderator

the only thing different huh? A fictional Deep State behind a fictional coup....but then...you aren't exactly blinded by logic either.

There is nothing "fictional" about the charge of Russian collusion that the democrats tried to use to ride Trump out of office with but the Russian collusion itself. There was none. None that Robert Mueller would certify, anyway.
The people still obsessed with this matter think they know better than that, however. Zealots always do.

The investigation, imo, was 100% merited. There was enough evidence for sufficient concern. Investigations don't start out with a conclusion, they gather evidence and build from that. The Mueller investigation was thorough, professional, non-partisan and left no stone unturned. I'm satisfied. I do want to see the report released. There was no evidence of criminal conspiracy, but obstruction was another matter. There is nothing fictional about any of that.

But I'm sure deluded leftists believe in the myth of Russian collusion in the same way that residents of mental institutions believe that cats talk to them or fairies and elves come and visit every night when the lights go out.

And deluded rightists will believe it was all a hoax-spawned witch-hunt and ignore the larger implications of it, just as they believe everyone is out to get Trump.

And given your open disdain for Trump as a "cult" are you being unbiased or letting how you feel about Trump allow you to treat him differently? We've already established you are OK treating people differently.

Which is, why I establish points, and not chase rabbits.

The problem with your reasoning is you ignore the points you don't like, including that Mueller was a highly respected prosecutor, that even Trump praised. He was a Republican (as if that would make any difference - people can belong to a political party and do a professional job even though rightists don't seem to believe that). I respect Mueller and I respect the job he did. I respect the findings of our own intelligence and that of other nations that reported Russian attempts to influence elections in multiple countries.

How about you? Are you allowing your bias for Trump to affect the way you view this investigation.

Hell, since you did it already, I'll throw in my own gratuitous Hilary - how about, given your well known antipathy towards her...you think that might influenced your view on the investigation done on her? Comey really screwed her after all.

I'm stopping at your first sentence as this is what you have done the entire thread.

But this is funny n caught my eye...i'm Trump neutral but you keep assigning me more. Why is that? Ignoring facts you don't like?

You just proved my point while struggling to make sense of your own. That has to hurt.

That dog don't hunt. Your posting history and positions you tend to take really don't support that.

Even here. You refuse to consider that there could have been a good reason to investigate Trump.

If there was a good reason to investigate you'd not have the fbi falsifying reports to FISA and using fictional dossiers.

Since this has come up and to see a lack of proper procedures and protocol being followed in the Flynn prosecution, It confounds me how it has gotten this far....
Not Mirandizing Flynn once they decided to charge him, much less possibly charge him with a crime is in and of itself criminal. I don't give a flying flip about how "affable" the agents wanted him to be, the fact that this one simple procedure wasn't done when it should have been is at the least immoral of any investigating authority, and at worst criminal in and of itself. Coming from the overall "Top Cop" agency should concern each and every one of us.... regardless of political affiliation.
Comey's brag about not following procedures is another dirty deed in all of this as well. Policies and Procedures do not change just because a new person steps in..... It doesn't matter if it's military, business nor government. Policies and Procedures are set and adhered to until they are formally changed by those capable of making those changes... and for any changes to take place is a process, until that process is done, then te status quo is intact. To deviate from that is flat out wrong.
There was a statement made about Hillary Clinton's treatment by Comey..... Talk about your apples and oranges... Hillary Clinton was assessed by the FBI to have actually committed a crime, and it kept coming back around and around due to several different reason... yet Comey admits, yes it was wrong but he would not charge her.... since when does the FBI get to decide who and who doesn't get sent up? isn't that the job of the Attorney General??? Yet Comey "really screwed her." I ask you this, who would you have the FBI treat you like? Hillary, or Flynn?

Let's see your evidence Flynn was not read his Miranda rights when he was taken into custody....

Into custody... I have no doubt he was.... Then.
However, when under investigation, suspicion, or there is the slightest possibility the person you are "having a conversation" with could be implicated in any way, shape, form or fashion, it is inherent upon the investigator to mirandize that individual.
I've done enough 15-6 investigations to know this, so why would seasoned FBI agents do otherwise? The answer to that question, is to make things fit their particular agenda.
It really is as simple as that.
Now, if you will excuse me the fish are biting...

The agenda of catching bad guys? How dare they!!!
Two Points...
1.Flynn was told that he could have an attorney present prior to the interview.

2. Flynn acknowledged in court that he had not been tricked by the FBI by not being told he could not lie, and that he knew lying to FBI agents was a federal crime.

Flynn's own words are damning.

yet comeys saying he did shit he'd not do to anyone else isn't.

got it.

Comey's words show he was reckless and disregarded proper procedures. That's not illegal, just wrong. Flynn lied to the FBI. That IS a crime. Contrary to what was claimed - he was told he could have a lawyer. He said he wasn't tricked.

yet if they have no regard for process and are willing to go around them to suit their end goal, you don't give a shit. you like the end goal.

i don't care who they do this to - it would be wrong. if they did it to you, me, slade, hillard, ANY OF US. the action is wrong and i don't care who it's against.

the minute you allow it for YOUR side, you get the divide we have today. so congrats. you play a huge role in your own frustrations.

You make a lot of ASSumptions.

I was and I am still seriously concerned about Russian attempts to influence elections - that's the elephant in the room that people like you avoid seeing or try to downplay. That is the real issue.

To that end - I fully supported the Mueller investigation - there was just too much obstruction, lies, and political games from both sides to not have an impartial professional NON PARTISAN investigation. And Mueller, by the way, was a Republican.

I don't have an "end goal" accept to make sure our electoral integrity and the public trust in our elections is preserved, and that (hopefully) we vote Trump out of office. Did you catch that bit? VOTE him out.

Going around the normal process is reckless - when police do it, it means what they find might not hold up in court. It indicates a person willing to bend or break rules. As a comparison - Comey did indeed go around normal process when he announced, days before the election, that he was reopening an investigation on Hilary (and that might have cost her the election, no way to ever know for sure). He bucked his DoJ bosses. (where is your outrage?) So he hasn't done this just to one side. He has shown himself to be willing to bend rules and to be a showboater. Not good qualities in his position.

Points to consider:
Did he do anything illegal? What laws did he break?

Did Flynn break the law? Yes. He did. And he knew it and knew what the laws were. Regardless of what process Comey circumvented - Flynn still was offered a lawyer, and he knew full well that lying to the FBI was a crime. And he stated he wasn't tricked. You can't just sweep that under the rug.

Comey's already fired but, I suspect if he weren't - he would be now - but it doesn't alter what Flynn did unless laws or rules were broken that prohibited the use of that interview. I think that is up to the courts to determine and they haven't been particularly sympathetic to Flynn so far. I'm fine with what the courts determine because that is their job.

Very well said. You win

Flynn was told he did not need lawyer. That was a fucking lie.

thats not what he was told you’re making that up.

See my former post with a link:

"Comey went on to say that although he took exception to the congressman’s characterization of McCabe’s statement as discouraging, he believed that it was written accurately. He said he had meant that it would be quicker to just speak privately with the agents."


“So I would read it as encouraging him to meet with the agents without White House Counsel present,” Comey said."

Yes, comey told him he could have WH counsel but, the interview was sold as a friendly conversation a Flynn was subsequently told he did not need a lawyer that the interview would be quicker.

And that is what law enforcement typically does. Flynn should know that. If you have a problem with it - you will need to retry a shitload of cases.

The FBI does not try to create crimes typically but they did in Flynn's case.

Lying to FBI agents is not a made up crime

McCabe and Storzk pretended they were welcoming Flynn as new National Security guy. As such, Flynn would have known about the coup so they had to set him up to lie. They pretended to have a casual conversation and when Flynn made misstatements in that casual conversation they sprung on him.

Yet they offered him the invite to bring council and he said in court that he was not tricked and that he lied. Sorry man, you can’t spin beyond that

Yet they offered him the invite to bring council and he said in court that he was not tricked and that he lied.

How much of his statement in court was coerced?

Don't know how things work in federal court?

Let me help.

In a federal court if you plead guilty, you have to "mea culpa". Which means you have profess with your mouth, loudly and clearly, that you understand the charge you are pleading guilty to, that you are doing so without any reservations or coercions, and exactly what crime you know that committed, and are pleading guilty to.

That leaves you no wiggle room to back out of it later, or claim ignorance, or coercion.

Oops.

And because the plea has been entered, there is no longer any speedy trial right. The judge can suspend sentencing indefinitely. You know, until after the election, and if things dont go your way, there won't be any pals left in the White House that can pardon him, and no fixer in the DOJ to make anymore suggestions to the court. In fact, a new DOJ, could bring even more charges after he is sentenced to prison on the current guilty plea.

In a federal court if you plead guilty, you have to "mea culpa". Which means you have profess with your mouth, loudly and clearly, that you understand the charge you are pleading guilty to, that you are doing so without any reservations or coercions, and exactly what crime you know that committed, and are pleading guilty to.

Yup. Even if you're coerced.

The judge can suspend sentencing indefinitely. You know, until after the election, and if things dont go your way, there won't be any pals left in the White House that can pardon him,

Trump can pardon him 5 minutes before he leaves office.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wow, Barr just dropped the case. Talk about the dirty dirty swamp. How embarrassing for our government

Yeah, when shown overwhelming evidence of FBI criminal conduct the DOJ only has one option, and that is to drop all charges.

That's what the RULE OF LAW, demands.

No, when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested... when trying to cover for a liar the charges get dropped... isn’t that what y’all said about Comey and Clinton?

when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested...

Exactly. If there was any evidence of criminal conduct in the phone call, he should have been arrested.

He wasn’t arrested for the phone call. He was questioned about it and arrested for lying about it. How do you still not understand this. We’ve been over it a dozen times now. Seriously... you’re just trolling at this point, am I right?

He wasn’t arrested for the phone call.

Exactly. Because nothing in the call was a crime.

He was questioned about it and arrested for lying about it.

Yes. He was arrested for, supposedly, non-material lies in a phony investigation.

How do you still not understand this.

I understand it perfectly.
If the FBI questions you about a non-criminal phone call, they can charge you if you lie.
Even if the lies are not material and there isn't a legitimate legal reason to even question you.

 

[beagle9]

the only thing different huh? A fictional Deep State behind a fictional coup....but then...you aren't exactly blinded by logic either.

There is nothing "fictional" about the charge of Russian collusion that the democrats tried to use to ride Trump out of office with but the Russian collusion itself. There was none. None that Robert Mueller would certify, anyway.
The people still obsessed with this matter think they know better than that, however. Zealots always do.

The investigation, imo, was 100% merited. There was enough evidence for sufficient concern. Investigations don't start out with a conclusion, they gather evidence and build from that. The Mueller investigation was thorough, professional, non-partisan and left no stone unturned. I'm satisfied. I do want to see the report released. There was no evidence of criminal conspiracy, but obstruction was another matter. There is nothing fictional about any of that.

But I'm sure deluded leftists believe in the myth of Russian collusion in the same way that residents of mental institutions believe that cats talk to them or fairies and elves come and visit every night when the lights go out.

And deluded rightists will believe it was all a hoax-spawned witch-hunt and ignore the larger implications of it, just as they believe everyone is out to get Trump.

And given your open disdain for Trump as a "cult" are you being unbiased or letting how you feel about Trump allow you to treat him differently? We've already established you are OK treating people differently.

Which is, why I establish points, and not chase rabbits.

The problem with your reasoning is you ignore the points you don't like, including that Mueller was a highly respected prosecutor, that even Trump praised. He was a Republican (as if that would make any difference - people can belong to a political party and do a professional job even though rightists don't seem to believe that). I respect Mueller and I respect the job he did. I respect the findings of our own intelligence and that of other nations that reported Russian attempts to influence elections in multiple countries.

How about you? Are you allowing your bias for Trump to affect the way you view this investigation.

Hell, since you did it already, I'll throw in my own gratuitous Hilary - how about, given your well known antipathy towards her...you think that might influenced your view on the investigation done on her? Comey really screwed her after all.

I'm stopping at your first sentence as this is what you have done the entire thread.

But this is funny n caught my eye...i'm Trump neutral but you keep assigning me more. Why is that? Ignoring facts you don't like?

You just proved my point while struggling to make sense of your own. That has to hurt.

That dog don't hunt. Your posting history and positions you tend to take really don't support that.

Even here. You refuse to consider that there could have been a good reason to investigate Trump.

If there was a good reason to investigate you'd not have the fbi falsifying reports to FISA and using fictional dossiers.

Since this has come up and to see a lack of proper procedures and protocol being followed in the Flynn prosecution, It confounds me how it has gotten this far....
Not Mirandizing Flynn once they decided to charge him, much less possibly charge him with a crime is in and of itself criminal. I don't give a flying flip about how "affable" the agents wanted him to be, the fact that this one simple procedure wasn't done when it should have been is at the least immoral of any investigating authority, and at worst criminal in and of itself. Coming from the overall "Top Cop" agency should concern each and every one of us.... regardless of political affiliation.
Comey's brag about not following procedures is another dirty deed in all of this as well. Policies and Procedures do not change just because a new person steps in..... It doesn't matter if it's military, business nor government. Policies and Procedures are set and adhered to until they are formally changed by those capable of making those changes... and for any changes to take place is a process, until that process is done, then te status quo is intact. To deviate from that is flat out wrong.
There was a statement made about Hillary Clinton's treatment by Comey..... Talk about your apples and oranges... Hillary Clinton was assessed by the FBI to have actually committed a crime, and it kept coming back around and around due to several different reason... yet Comey admits, yes it was wrong but he would not charge her.... since when does the FBI get to decide who and who doesn't get sent up? isn't that the job of the Attorney General??? Yet Comey "really screwed her." I ask you this, who would you have the FBI treat you like? Hillary, or Flynn?

Let's see your evidence Flynn was not read his Miranda rights when he was taken into custody....

Into custody... I have no doubt he was.... Then.
However, when under investigation, suspicion, or there is the slightest possibility the person you are "having a conversation" with could be implicated in any way, shape, form or fashion, it is inherent upon the investigator to mirandize that individual.
I've done enough 15-6 investigations to know this, so why would seasoned FBI agents do otherwise? The answer to that question, is to make things fit their particular agenda.
It really is as simple as that.
Now, if you will excuse me the fish are biting...

The agenda of catching bad guys? How dare they!!!
Two Points...
1.Flynn was told that he could have an attorney present prior to the interview.

2. Flynn acknowledged in court that he had not been tricked by the FBI by not being told he could not lie, and that he knew lying to FBI agents was a federal crime.

Flynn's own words are damning.

yet comeys saying he did shit he'd not do to anyone else isn't.

got it.

Comey's words show he was reckless and disregarded proper procedures. That's not illegal, just wrong. Flynn lied to the FBI. That IS a crime. Contrary to what was claimed - he was told he could have a lawyer. He said he wasn't tricked.

yet if they have no regard for process and are willing to go around them to suit their end goal, you don't give a shit. you like the end goal.

i don't care who they do this to - it would be wrong. if they did it to you, me, slade, hillard, ANY OF US. the action is wrong and i don't care who it's against.

the minute you allow it for YOUR side, you get the divide we have today. so congrats. you play a huge role in your own frustrations.

You make a lot of ASSumptions.

I was and I am still seriously concerned about Russian attempts to influence elections - that's the elephant in the room that people like you avoid seeing or try to downplay. That is the real issue.

To that end - I fully supported the Mueller investigation - there was just too much obstruction, lies, and political games from both sides to not have an impartial professional NON PARTISAN investigation. And Mueller, by the way, was a Republican.

I don't have an "end goal" accept to make sure our electoral integrity and the public trust in our elections is preserved, and that (hopefully) we vote Trump out of office. Did you catch that bit? VOTE him out.

Going around the normal process is reckless - when police do it, it means what they find might not hold up in court. It indicates a person willing to bend or break rules. As a comparison - Comey did indeed go around normal process when he announced, days before the election, that he was reopening an investigation on Hilary (and that might have cost her the election, no way to ever know for sure). He bucked his DoJ bosses. (where is your outrage?) So he hasn't done this just to one side. He has shown himself to be willing to bend rules and to be a showboater. Not good qualities in his position.

Points to consider:
Did he do anything illegal? What laws did he break?

Did Flynn break the law? Yes. He did. And he knew it and knew what the laws were. Regardless of what process Comey circumvented - Flynn still was offered a lawyer, and he knew full well that lying to the FBI was a crime. And he stated he wasn't tricked. You can't just sweep that under the rug.

Comey's already fired but, I suspect if he weren't - he would be now - but it doesn't alter what Flynn did unless laws or rules were broken that prohibited the use of that interview. I think that is up to the courts to determine and they haven't been particularly sympathetic to Flynn so far. I'm fine with what the courts determine because that is their job.

Very well said. You win

Flynn was told he did not need lawyer. That was a fucking lie.

But it's OK when they do it.

Comey: FBI told Flynn he could have lawyer in interview

Flynn’s attorneys accused the FBI deputy director at the time, Andrew McCabe, of pushing their client into not having counsel present during his interview with bureau officials.

www.politico.com

Former FBI Director James Comey says Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, was told he could have an attorney present during a meeting with bureau officials last year, but Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one.

“I believe the deputy director volunteered to him that you are welcome to have somebody present from the White House Counsel’s Office,” Comey told lawmakers on Monday, according to a transcript released Tuesday. “And I think he said, in substance, there’d be no need for that.”



Flynn's choice. Just like he made a CHOICE to lie. He would not have needed a lawyer if he hadn't lied...

It was a coerced choice. Misremembering is not a lie.

Correct... misremembering can be an honest mistake. That’s not what happened here. If a NSA forgets that he asked a foreign government to not react to sanctions then he is either lying or mentally retarded. I won’t rule out the later but since he said he lied in court I don’t think there is much to debate here. Y’all just sound desperate to cover for a liar

No not desperate to cover for a liar, because that's not the issue here. The issue is how did they pressure the man into making statement's in which they wanted without setting him up, and then why did they set him up ?? The reason was to add to the Domino affect in which was being conducted by the swamp creatures in order to (in their hopes) get Trump.

Of course the left wants to cover that up, and are desperate to do so.

They didn't need to pressure him. They didn't need to set him up. He plead guilty TWICE, he openly stated he wasn't set up. And he LIED. The judge saw all the documentation.

Lied due to threats ??? Were those threats off the record, just like they conducted the interviews in a casual sort of "you don't need a lawyer sort of way, (i.e. we just want to talk) ? No big deal right.

 

[beagle9]

Wow, Barr just dropped the case. Talk about the dirty dirty swamp. How embarrassing for our government

Yeah, when shown overwhelming evidence of FBI criminal conduct the DOJ only has one option, and that is to drop all charges.

That's what the RULE OF LAW, demands.

No, when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested... when trying to cover for a liar the charges get dropped... isn’t that what y’all said about Comey and Clinton?

when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested...

Exactly. If there was any evidence of criminal conduct in the phone call, he should have been arrested.

Lying to the FBI is a crime.

Only if the FBI was conducting itself in a legal ethical Manor. Wasn't the case was it ?

 

[Slade3200]

You make a lot of ASSumptions about liberals none of which are right unless you dig into conspiracy theory propaganda.

What's funny is that you would support foreign countries attempting to interfere in our elections.

What's sad is you would make this preposterous charge in order to prop up your absurd claims.
Desperate people make desperate claims.

What preposterous charge? That Russia was actively trying to interfere in elections, not only in the US but among our allies?

Russian interference was an excuse to try to get rid of Trump.

Russian interference was A reality that was uncovered by all of our intel agencies including Trumps guys.

Russian interference was A reality

Is there anything worse than a weaponized meme?

minimize it all you want but Trumps own intel directors have confirmed it and spoken out to its seriousness

Trumps own intel directors have confirmed it

I know!

It's awful when stupid Dem voters are tricked into voting for Trump.

Huh? What point are you trying to make?

 

[westwall]

Looks Like the Trump Admin is Bringing Dark Secrets to The Light

the only thing different huh? A fictional Deep State behind a fictional coup....but then...you aren't exactly blinded by logic either. There is nothing "fictional" about the charge of Russian collusion that the democrats tried to use to ride Trump out of office with but the Russian collusion...

www.usmessageboard.com

But the federal judge in Washington overseeing the case, Emmet G. Sullivan, forcefully rejected most of the defense’s claims in a 92-page ruling in December.


Corruption.

Yeah, BEFORE the criminal activity of the FBI was exposed.

You need to catch up to the current timeline.

What laws did they break?

Altering a 302 is called perjury

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wow, Barr just dropped the case. Talk about the dirty dirty swamp. How embarrassing for our government

Just goes to show the depth of corruption this administration has created.

This administration is rooting out corruption.

This admin is more corrupt than every admin since Nixon

Don't sugar coat it, Obama's administration was more corrupt than Nixon.

according to right wing conspiracy theories yes Obama was the worst Perez and most corrupt. According to stats facts and reality. Trump has brought the swamp in the name of cleaning the swamp.

Yes, Obama using the IRS and DOJ to attack political opponents....worse than anything Nixon did.

 

[Coyote]

Looks Like the Trump Admin is Bringing Dark Secrets to The Light

the only thing different huh? A fictional Deep State behind a fictional coup....but then...you aren't exactly blinded by logic either. There is nothing "fictional" about the charge of Russian collusion that the democrats tried to use to ride Trump out of office with but the Russian collusion...

www.usmessageboard.com

But the federal judge in Washington overseeing the case, Emmet G. Sullivan, forcefully rejected most of the defense’s claims in a 92-page ruling in December.


Corruption.

Yeah, BEFORE the criminal activity of the FBI was exposed.

You need to catch up to the current timeline.

What laws did they break?

Altering a 302 is called perjury

Apparently there is confusion between drafts and the final version. If it was criminal altered the judge would have thrown the case out.

 

[Slade3200]

the only thing different huh? A fictional Deep State behind a fictional coup....but then...you aren't exactly blinded by logic either.

There is nothing "fictional" about the charge of Russian collusion that the democrats tried to use to ride Trump out of office with but the Russian collusion itself. There was none. None that Robert Mueller would certify, anyway.
The people still obsessed with this matter think they know better than that, however. Zealots always do.

The investigation, imo, was 100% merited. There was enough evidence for sufficient concern. Investigations don't start out with a conclusion, they gather evidence and build from that. The Mueller investigation was thorough, professional, non-partisan and left no stone unturned. I'm satisfied. I do want to see the report released. There was no evidence of criminal conspiracy, but obstruction was another matter. There is nothing fictional about any of that.

But I'm sure deluded leftists believe in the myth of Russian collusion in the same way that residents of mental institutions believe that cats talk to them or fairies and elves come and visit every night when the lights go out.

And deluded rightists will believe it was all a hoax-spawned witch-hunt and ignore the larger implications of it, just as they believe everyone is out to get Trump.

And given your open disdain for Trump as a "cult" are you being unbiased or letting how you feel about Trump allow you to treat him differently? We've already established you are OK treating people differently.

Which is, why I establish points, and not chase rabbits.

The problem with your reasoning is you ignore the points you don't like, including that Mueller was a highly respected prosecutor, that even Trump praised. He was a Republican (as if that would make any difference - people can belong to a political party and do a professional job even though rightists don't seem to believe that). I respect Mueller and I respect the job he did. I respect the findings of our own intelligence and that of other nations that reported Russian attempts to influence elections in multiple countries.

How about you? Are you allowing your bias for Trump to affect the way you view this investigation.

Hell, since you did it already, I'll throw in my own gratuitous Hilary - how about, given your well known antipathy towards her...you think that might influenced your view on the investigation done on her? Comey really screwed her after all.

I'm stopping at your first sentence as this is what you have done the entire thread.

But this is funny n caught my eye...i'm Trump neutral but you keep assigning me more. Why is that? Ignoring facts you don't like?

You just proved my point while struggling to make sense of your own. That has to hurt.

That dog don't hunt. Your posting history and positions you tend to take really don't support that.

Even here. You refuse to consider that there could have been a good reason to investigate Trump.

If there was a good reason to investigate you'd not have the fbi falsifying reports to FISA and using fictional dossiers.

Since this has come up and to see a lack of proper procedures and protocol being followed in the Flynn prosecution, It confounds me how it has gotten this far....
Not Mirandizing Flynn once they decided to charge him, much less possibly charge him with a crime is in and of itself criminal. I don't give a flying flip about how "affable" the agents wanted him to be, the fact that this one simple procedure wasn't done when it should have been is at the least immoral of any investigating authority, and at worst criminal in and of itself. Coming from the overall "Top Cop" agency should concern each and every one of us.... regardless of political affiliation.
Comey's brag about not following procedures is another dirty deed in all of this as well. Policies and Procedures do not change just because a new person steps in..... It doesn't matter if it's military, business nor government. Policies and Procedures are set and adhered to until they are formally changed by those capable of making those changes... and for any changes to take place is a process, until that process is done, then te status quo is intact. To deviate from that is flat out wrong.
There was a statement made about Hillary Clinton's treatment by Comey..... Talk about your apples and oranges... Hillary Clinton was assessed by the FBI to have actually committed a crime, and it kept coming back around and around due to several different reason... yet Comey admits, yes it was wrong but he would not charge her.... since when does the FBI get to decide who and who doesn't get sent up? isn't that the job of the Attorney General??? Yet Comey "really screwed her." I ask you this, who would you have the FBI treat you like? Hillary, or Flynn?

Let's see your evidence Flynn was not read his Miranda rights when he was taken into custody....

Into custody... I have no doubt he was.... Then.
However, when under investigation, suspicion, or there is the slightest possibility the person you are "having a conversation" with could be implicated in any way, shape, form or fashion, it is inherent upon the investigator to mirandize that individual.
I've done enough 15-6 investigations to know this, so why would seasoned FBI agents do otherwise? The answer to that question, is to make things fit their particular agenda.
It really is as simple as that.
Now, if you will excuse me the fish are biting...

The agenda of catching bad guys? How dare they!!!
Two Points...
1.Flynn was told that he could have an attorney present prior to the interview.

2. Flynn acknowledged in court that he had not been tricked by the FBI by not being told he could not lie, and that he knew lying to FBI agents was a federal crime.

Flynn's own words are damning.

yet comeys saying he did shit he'd not do to anyone else isn't.

got it.

Comey's words show he was reckless and disregarded proper procedures. That's not illegal, just wrong. Flynn lied to the FBI. That IS a crime. Contrary to what was claimed - he was told he could have a lawyer. He said he wasn't tricked.

yet if they have no regard for process and are willing to go around them to suit their end goal, you don't give a shit. you like the end goal.

i don't care who they do this to - it would be wrong. if they did it to you, me, slade, hillard, ANY OF US. the action is wrong and i don't care who it's against.

the minute you allow it for YOUR side, you get the divide we have today. so congrats. you play a huge role in your own frustrations.

You make a lot of ASSumptions.

I was and I am still seriously concerned about Russian attempts to influence elections - that's the elephant in the room that people like you avoid seeing or try to downplay. That is the real issue.

To that end - I fully supported the Mueller investigation - there was just too much obstruction, lies, and political games from both sides to not have an impartial professional NON PARTISAN investigation. And Mueller, by the way, was a Republican.

I don't have an "end goal" accept to make sure our electoral integrity and the public trust in our elections is preserved, and that (hopefully) we vote Trump out of office. Did you catch that bit? VOTE him out.

Going around the normal process is reckless - when police do it, it means what they find might not hold up in court. It indicates a person willing to bend or break rules. As a comparison - Comey did indeed go around normal process when he announced, days before the election, that he was reopening an investigation on Hilary (and that might have cost her the election, no way to ever know for sure). He bucked his DoJ bosses. (where is your outrage?) So he hasn't done this just to one side. He has shown himself to be willing to bend rules and to be a showboater. Not good qualities in his position.

Points to consider:
Did he do anything illegal? What laws did he break?

Did Flynn break the law? Yes. He did. And he knew it and knew what the laws were. Regardless of what process Comey circumvented - Flynn still was offered a lawyer, and he knew full well that lying to the FBI was a crime. And he stated he wasn't tricked. You can't just sweep that under the rug.

Comey's already fired but, I suspect if he weren't - he would be now - but it doesn't alter what Flynn did unless laws or rules were broken that prohibited the use of that interview. I think that is up to the courts to determine and they haven't been particularly sympathetic to Flynn so far. I'm fine with what the courts determine because that is their job.

Very well said. You win

Flynn was told he did not need lawyer. That was a fucking lie.

thats not what he was told you’re making that up.

See my former post with a link:

"Comey went on to say that although he took exception to the congressman’s characterization of McCabe’s statement as discouraging, he believed that it was written accurately. He said he had meant that it would be quicker to just speak privately with the agents."


“So I would read it as encouraging him to meet with the agents without White House Counsel present,” Comey said."

Yes, comey told him he could have WH counsel but, the interview was sold as a friendly conversation a Flynn was subsequently told he did not need a lawyer that the interview would be quicker.

And that is what law enforcement typically does. Flynn should know that. If you have a problem with it - you will need to retry a shitload of cases.

The FBI does not try to create crimes typically but they did in Flynn's case.

Lying to FBI agents is not a made up crime

McCabe and Storzk pretended they were welcoming Flynn as new National Security guy. As such, Flynn would have known about the coup so they had to set him up to lie. They pretended to have a casual conversation and when Flynn made misstatements in that casual conversation they sprung on him.

Yet they offered him the invite to bring council and he said in court that he was not tricked and that he lied. Sorry man, you can’t spin beyond that

Yet they offered him the invite to bring council and he said in court that he was not tricked and that he lied.

How much of his statement in court was coerced?

His statements are his statements. Your arguments are so pathetic. When he lies it is because the Obama FBI tricked him. When he confesses it’s because he was coerced. Give me a break... you’re just trolling right? There’s no way you actually believe that weak ass narrative, right?

His statements are his statements.

Even when they're coerced.

When he lies it is because the Obama FBI tricked him.

Any lie was not material.

No not when coerced... Ive seen no evidence that shows anything was coerced. And none has been provided.

when somebody lies to the FBI it is material and it is a crime

 

[Coyote]

You make a lot of ASSumptions about liberals none of which are right unless you dig into conspiracy theory propaganda.

What's funny is that you would support foreign countries attempting to interfere in our elections.

What's sad is you would make this preposterous charge in order to prop up your absurd claims.
Desperate people make desperate claims.

What preposterous charge? That Russia was actively trying to interfere in elections, not only in the US but among our allies?

Russian interference was an excuse to try to get rid of Trump.

Russian interference was A reality that was uncovered by all of our intel agencies including Trumps guys.

Russian interference was A reality

Is there anything worse than a weaponized meme?

minimize it all you want but Trumps own intel directors have confirmed it and spoken out to its seriousness

Trumps own intel directors have confirmed it

I know!

It's awful when stupid Dem voters are tricked into voting for Trump.

Huh? What point are you trying to make?

The usual dumb one that claims there was no interference.

 

[Slade3200]

Wow, Barr just dropped the case. Talk about the dirty dirty swamp. How embarrassing for our government

Yeah, when shown overwhelming evidence of FBI criminal conduct the DOJ only has one option, and that is to drop all charges.

That's what the RULE OF LAW, demands.

No, when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested... when trying to cover for a liar the charges get dropped... isn’t that what y’all said about Comey and Clinton?

when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested...

Exactly. If there was any evidence of criminal conduct in the phone call, he should have been arrested.

He wasn’t arrested for the phone call. He was questioned about it and arrested for lying about it. How do you still not understand this. We’ve been over it a dozen times now. Seriously... you’re just trolling at this point, am I right?

He wasn’t arrested for the phone call.

Exactly. Because nothing in the call was a crime.

He was questioned about it and arrested for lying about it.

Yes. He was arrested for, supposedly, non-material lies in a phony investigation.

How do you still not understand this.

I understand it perfectly.
If the FBI questions you about a non-criminal phone call, they can charge you if you lie.
Even if the lies are not material and there isn't a legitimate legal reason to even question you.

“Non material lies” and “phony investigation” are Emotional partisan excuses and not based on fact

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wow, Barr just dropped the case. Talk about the dirty dirty swamp. How embarrassing for our government

Yeah, when shown overwhelming evidence of FBI criminal conduct the DOJ only has one option, and that is to drop all charges.

That's what the RULE OF LAW, demands.

No, when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested... when trying to cover for a liar the charges get dropped... isn’t that what y’all said about Comey and Clinton?

when shown evidence of criminal conduct people should get arrested...

Exactly. If there was any evidence of criminal conduct in the phone call, he should have been arrested.

Lying to the FBI is a crime.

Yup.
And the fact that the lies were not material means he shouldn't have been charged with perjury.