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

[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.

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

Only because it's true.

 

[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.

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

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

You've lost. Try and accept it.

 

[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.

Huh? What point are you trying to make?

Dem voters are stupid.

Do I need to t-y-p-e s-l-o-w-e-r?

 

[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.

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

As the deep state crumbles, the facts will come to light in the case of Flynn being set up in order to get Trump.

 

[Slade3200]

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

If the 302s were illegally altered them the DOJ should have made an arrest. It doesn’t change the fact that Flynn lied and Flynn admitted to the lie.

 

[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.

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

when somebody lies to the FBI it is material

Not always.

 

[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.

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn...

What reason?

they were investigating Russian interference in an election.

Cool. The phone call was after the election.

Flynn was part of the trump campaign.

Then their questions should have been about stuff before the election.

Flynn had been in communication with the Russians.

Then question him about pre-election contacts. No crime in the post-election call.

It doesn’t get any more material than that

Durr.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

A call between the incoming National Security Advisor and a Russian ambassador is absolutely proper and
routine and just what one would expect. Leftists lose their minds even more, if possible.

 

[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

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

They went back and altered the 302's to conform to their new story. That is perjury no matter how you try and sugar coat it.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that.

There was a whole gang of Obama-ites listening in to Flynn's phone call with Kisyluk. They know exactly what was said and your facile b.s. post is just that...facile and full of b.s.

 

[westwall]

A call between the incoming National Security Advisor and a Russian ambassador is absolutely proper and
routine and just what one would expect. Leftists lose their minds even more, if possible.

What's interesting is obummer told Yates about the conversation. How did he know about it?

Looks like obummer was colluding with the russki's after all.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

What's interesting is obummer told Yates about the conversation. How did he know about it?

Looks like obummer was colluding with the russki's after all.

What it shows is that Obama knew all about the secret campaign to spy and concoct a rationale for keeping tabs on the incoming president...therefor Obama was part of the scheme to take down Trump while he was still in office. And then his FBI and Justice Department and intelligence people continued that scheme.

 

[Meister]

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

Obama should have handled that, don't you think, I mean, he was aware of of it in 2016.
Trump didn't take office until after the election.

Sure... he tried to work with McConnell to make moves in a bipartisan way that wouldn’t be perceived as him trying to mess with the election. McConnell refused.

What moves? Couldn't have been much...he was president at the time remember?
Obama just didn't want to rock the boat. If he had done something about it covertly, and swept it
under the rug like so much else in his administration, I would have given him Kudos for doing so.

If Obama would have taken any aggressive action that made headlines you all would still be ranting that he abused his power to try and influence the election. Hell, you’re pushing that narrative anyways! Pathetic.

and if you dont know what Obama tried to do with McConnell about Russian interference then you haven’t been paying attention. Go do your homework now.

Denial. On Oct. 18, 2016, President Obama made a comment that rivals his “ISIS is the jayvee team” remark in terms of its wrongheadedness. He declared that “no serious person” would suggest America’s elections could be rigged. “There's no evidence that that has happened in the past or that there are instances in which that will happen this time,” said Obama.
Suspicious timing. Russia’s election interference certainly was not new on election day. Yet only after Trump was elected (instead of Hillary Clinton) did President Obama assign his intel officials to issue a public report about Russia’s scheme. And only then did he pursue punishment, including sanctions and expulsion of some Russian diplomats from the United States.

10 factors making Russia election interference the most enduring scandal of the Obama era

Politics so distracted Obama intel officials that they lost sight of the very danger they now claim threatens our democracy.

thehill.com

Obama's biggest mistake was not going public with the Russian interference

Can't attempt to use it to set someone up if go public with it, so was he using it to set someone (Hillary's political opponent), up at a later date, even though the raw connections weren't there ?? Otherwise the Russians were doing what they always do (interfering), but was that looked at in someway as a way (to apply it), in order to change an election outcome ??

The insurance policy

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The insurance policy

Strzok and Comey were insurance salesman pushing the deep state to increase it's coverage so Trump
could never hold office, and failing that, stay in office. Are we supposed to thank them for their sedition?

 

[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.

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn...

What reason?

they were investigating Russian interference in an election.

Cool. The phone call was after the election.

Flynn was part of the trump campaign.

Then their questions should have been about stuff before the election.

Flynn had been in communication with the Russians.

Then question him about pre-election contacts. No crime in the post-election call.

It doesn’t get any more material than that

Durr.

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s phone call with Russia except for he lied about it and got fired because of it. Just because it happened after the election doesn’t make Flynn’s relationship with Russia and communications, known and unknown, not a relevant line of questioning. Are you playing stupid or do you really not get it?

 

[Slade3200]

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that.

There was a whole gang of Obama-ites listening in to Flynn's phone call with Kisyluk. They know exactly what was said and your facile b.s. post is just that...facile and full of b.s.

On the contrary, Flynn was fired by Trump for lying about the call. He was questioned by the FBI and indicted under Rosenstein and Wrays leadership. The case against Flynn has been ongoing for years now... so if yoir pointing at Obama’s people you also need to point to Trumps people.

 

[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.

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn...

What reason?

they were investigating Russian interference in an election.

Cool. The phone call was after the election.

Flynn was part of the trump campaign.

Then their questions should have been about stuff before the election.

Flynn had been in communication with the Russians.

Then question him about pre-election contacts. No crime in the post-election call.

It doesn’t get any more material than that

Durr.

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s phone call with Russia except for he lied about it and got fired because of it. Just because it happened after the election doesn’t make Flynn’s relationship with Russia and communications, known and unknown, not a relevant line of questioning. Are you playing stupid or do you really not get it?

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s phone call with Russia except for he lied about it

Exactly. A lie that was not material.

Just because it happened after the election doesn’t make Flynn’s relationship with Russia and communications, known and unknown, not a relevant line of questioning.

Any lie about the known communication, the one that didn't involve the election or any wrongdoing, isn't material. And there was no wrongdoing uncovered about any other calls.

 

[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.

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn...

What reason?

they were investigating Russian interference in an election.

Cool. The phone call was after the election.

Flynn was part of the trump campaign.

Then their questions should have been about stuff before the election.

Flynn had been in communication with the Russians.

Then question him about pre-election contacts. No crime in the post-election call.

It doesn’t get any more material than that

Durr.

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s phone call with Russia except for he lied about it and got fired because of it. Just because it happened after the election doesn’t make Flynn’s relationship with Russia and communications, known and unknown, not a relevant line of questioning. Are you playing stupid or do you really not get it?

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s phone call with Russia except for he lied about it

Exactly. A lie that was not material.

Just because it happened after the election doesn’t make Flynn’s relationship with Russia and communications, known and unknown, not a relevant line of questioning.

Any lie about the known communication, the one that didn't involve the election or any wrongdoing, isn't material. And there was no wrongdoing uncovered about any other calls.

Oh you poor soul... no you don’t lie to cops about anything. You never know where details lead in the course of an investigation... facts need to be uncovered. You don’t set a precedent that if you don’t think a question is related to a crime that’s under investigation it’s ok to lie. As soon as Flynn started lying he deserved to get pressed. I would have been irresponsible to not go that route. If Flynn didn’t want to disclose something or If he didn’t remember he could have responded I’m several other ways. But lying was not ok. Stop making excuses for him

 

[Leo123]

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.

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn... they were investigating Russian interference in an election. Flynn was part of the trump campaign. Flynn had been in communication with the Russians. It doesn’t get any more material than that

There was legitimate reason to question Flynn...

What reason?

they were investigating Russian interference in an election.

Cool. The phone call was after the election.

Flynn was part of the trump campaign.

Then their questions should have been about stuff before the election.

Flynn had been in communication with the Russians.

Then question him about pre-election contacts. No crime in the post-election call.

It doesn’t get any more material than that

Durr.

There was nothing wrong with Flynn’s phone call with Russia except for he lied about it and got fired because of it. Just because it happened after the election doesn’t make Flynn’s relationship with Russia and communications, known and unknown, not a relevant line of questioning. Are you playing stupid or do you really not get it?

If there was nothing wrong with Flynn's call, why did the FBI try to trip him up on it?