Why Would Joe Biden Request the Unmasking of General Flynn?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Forget Trump....for crying out loud...we the people got screwed with this bull crap investigation...the cost in time and dollars and wasted

Funny how you never worry about cost when a Democrat is being investigated.

Given your obvious flaming hypocrisy here, why shouldn't everyone just assume that everything you say is similarly based on rank partisan hypocrisy?

Because they do.

Thanks for making everyone's point for them, mamooth.

You only seem to be interested when it's a Republican being investigated.

Sit down and shut up, ye hypocrite.

He has a point. None of these clowns said a peep about the time and cost spent investigating Dems.

How many died because of Russian collusion that did not exist?

 

[Deleted member 73486]

I file this whole episode under the "who the hell cares we are in the middle of a pandemic" category!

 

[Rambunctious]

Forget Trump....for crying out loud...we the people got screwed with this bull crap investigation...the cost in time and dollars and wasted

Funny how you never worry about cost when a Democrat is being investigated.

Given your obvious flaming hypocrisy here, why shouldn't everyone just assume that everything you say is similarly based on rank partisan hypocrisy?

Because they do.

The comparisons are not realistic.....dems will investigate a guy for not pulling his zipper all the way up.....

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Treason is the answer, he was committing treason.... I want Obama, Biden, and all of their co-conspirators executed! Folks, this is war, the entire democratic party is engaged in open treason, and they are at war with the United States, no election in which a single democrat is elected to anything, can ever be taken to be legitimate again! Do you fucking understand? They corrupted everything, the entire system is now rendered illegitimate, this is what Obama was working at for 8 years, and he had ample help in this endeavor from John Boehner, Paul Ryan, and about half of the republicans sitting in the United States senate, the whole thing is a giant conspiracy. I now firmly believe democrats, and their mega-billionaire patrons, conspired with communist China in loosing the corona-virus upon the planet.... Folks, Obama was working on behalf of a foreign power, can you spell C H I N A?

In 2015 when the world thought Hillary was going to win the writing was on the wall. Her rallys had lost steam an attendance. She was visibly tired. Shitstain obama didn't trust the Trump insurance the white guys were selling. He wanted insurance of his own. He paid the Wuhan biowarfare lab 3.7 million dollars for a virus. In late 2019 he took delivery. With the democrats directing the virus Trump would never be reelected.

 

[ColonelAngus]

This was all Obama trying to get Flynn to flip on Trump.

Most corrupt administration ever.

 

[DOTR]

No, Mamooth, you are displaying classic signs of denial. You don't want to understand the realities of this situation because you don't want to. It is beyond your capacity to reason.

The reality is that the Flynn unmasking was a routine operation, one that happens thousands of times a year in any administration.

The reality is that Flynn was communicating with those involved with Russian election interference, and US intelligence officials needed to know who he was so they could understand the context of those communications.

Either you didn't know that, which makes you a rube, or you did know it, which means you're actively running interference for the Russians. Which is it? In either case, it means nobody should pay attention to you.

The reality is that Trump himself declared that Flynn was totally guilty.


---
I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!
Donald J. Trump Dec. 2, 2017
---

According to your conspiracy theory, Trump was apparently one of the ones conspiring against Trump.

That illustrates the big benefit of being a Trump cultist -- they're all blessedly free of the curse of long-term memory. To a Trump cultist, reality is whatever they imagine it to be at any given moment.

The reality, despite this sea of words, is this:

Who leaked his name to the Washington Post? (See 18 U.S.C. 798 (a)(1)) Who blackmailed him into pleading guilty to those trumped-up charges, lest they go after his son?

What would you have done? Would you A) offer your son up as a sacrifice to save your own hide or B) or would you plead guilty to spare your son the wrath of a corrupt government?

Who altered the 302 forms? Why was Joe Biden seeking his to unmask his identity? These are questions you don't want to consider.

You are too politically biased to see the injustice being perpetrated. You just want the man punished because he worked for Trump. That's it. That's all.

He was blackmailed? Really?

Charges were Trumped up and he did not lie? There is no question he lied and no question that lying to the FBI is a crime.

His son, involved in his business, did not participate in talks concerning a payment scheme to kidnap and deliver a Turkish cleric residing in the US to Turkey?

Were the forms altered? Or are you looking at drafts and making that claim?

Did Biden seek to unmask Flynn (a ridiculous term since Flynn was not undercover).? Or was Biden one of a long list of people authorized to receive the information?

Now let's check the political bias.

If this coup attempt is not severely punished then expect more in the future. We have to break up this cabal of deep staters and punish them publicly. Not only the actual political and civil service actors who perpetuated the coup attempt but their media handlers as well.

Heads gotta roll or we may as well validate this as acceptible.

However, that means Trump could now fo all this. It's OK. The left has said so.

That is why Barr needs to be investigated when Democrats take the White House.

Investigated for what?

Haven't you libtards learned yet that you can just decide to investigate someone because you hate them?

....and how many investigations did you launch against Hilary?.......conservatards.

but but but ... hillary....

my point here is, are you wanting actual justice, or revenge justice?

there's a huge difference. you seem to want revenge justice.

What we are seeing now is revenge justice unfortunately.

With you going after Trump, agreed.

When you but but but Hillary was investigated, it's also saying what is being done to Trump is revenge for the Hillary investigations.

Saying "you are full of shit" is not revenge, it's enough 8s enough.

You know, you keep saying I'm the one that is emotional, but you are the one who keeps bringing emotion into this. You are so focused on it, you keep making it personal.

Trump is going on a round of vendettas - of revenge investigations and firings. I think that would be pretty clear to an IMPARTIAL person observing this given that there is little to no reason (other than he has the right to). What should you, but clearly doesn't is using the government apparatus to chase down conspiracy theories. That's your tax dollars at work here.

Good day

good. maybe then you'll see what i mean when you keep harping on one thing. i had no other way to show you than keep harping on the same thing over and over and over and over and over again.

if you wish to call that extreme behavior, sure. i agree. just done to prove a point.

now, what is it when you harp on trump over and over and over and over and over again even when he's not the topic of conversation?

the problem is you see vendetta, others see payback. we go back to hillary, that was payback for xyz... we keep going back but also keep pretending this "payback" concept is new and simply began with trump.

sorry, that mindset began LONG AGO (this revenge politics) and in each instance there's usually a "hold my beer" escalation UP UNTIL we push things so far you get trump as your president. so trump is merely the outcome of our own dysfunction and inability to simply talk to each other w/o looking for an angle to attack under.

I don't harp on Trump all the time. I discuss politics. Over and over I post sources to what I say and try to back up. If I want to discuss Trump, it's my prerogative.

What's the difference between payback and vendetta?

Not much.

Unfortunately with Trump & Co, the vendetta's cover a wide range of non-political people who has soon as they speak are slandered, their characters destroyed and even stuff made up about them.

With Trump we've reached an unbelievable low where conspiracy theories are propagated from the very top and we don't even agree on essential facts that used to hold us together despite political differences. For example, Russia's attempts to interfere in our elections and hack us, should not have been so divisive. It was strongly supported by multiple intelligence agencies and even other countries. Instead we have a president trying to claim Ukraine was behind it, and direct taxpayer dollars and intelligence assets to try and "prove it".

Idiocracy.

Forget Trump....for crying out loud...we the people got screwed with this bull crap investigation...the cost in time and dollars and wasted do nothing government....a costly impeachment that proved nothing....legislation put on hold by the house...no infrastructure bill because of the house.....bridges and airports and roads falling apart....no this has long passed being about Trump....this is an attack on us the people to make us tired of Trump's presidency......and you are rolling right along with that......

"..this is an attack on us the people to make us tired of Trump's presidency......"

You nailed it. This is the ruling class saying punishing Americans for rejecting their rule. A scorched earth policy of paralysis. This coup must be punished after next election else what was it all for?

 

[Arresmillao]

Liberals are so scared. I love it.

This is all because Flynn was going to overturn many of Obama’s stupid policies and blow the whistle on Obama illegally spying on Trump.

Sure, flynn is a confessed criminal traitor, but it is Barack's fault, deplorables are so dumb...

View attachment 336163View attachment 336164View attachment 336165View attachment 336167View attachment 336169View attachment 336170

Traitor?

What did he do that makes him a traitor? Be very specific Arresmillao

Watch this....................

He beat HIllary. We all know the answer. They do as well.

ORANGE MAN BAD

Wrong, Hilary beat shitolini by 3 million votes, shitolini put in WH because of technicality called electoral college, which has not done very well for america resulting in the most moronic potus in history in shitolini, and a shadow potus in bush jr...

View attachment 336188View attachment 336189

The technicality is called the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION you weirdo.

Constitution is over rated, a piece of paper by slave owners solely to benefit slave owners. a real vote is a voter, and hillary received 3 million more of those than shitolini...

 

[DOTR]

Forget Trump....for crying out loud...we the people got screwed with this bull crap investigation...the cost in time and dollars and wasted

Funny how you never worry about cost when a Democrat is being investigated.

Given your obvious flaming hypocrisy here, why shouldn't everyone just assume that everything you say is similarly based on rank partisan hypocrisy?

Because they do.

Thanks for making everyone's point for them, mamooth.

You only seem to be interested when it's a Republican being investigated.

Sit down and shut up, ye hypocrite.

He has a point. None of these clowns said a peep about the time and cost spent investigating Dems.

How many died because of Russian collusion that did not exist?

The Russian collusion story served Putins needs until it just played out. The Democrats followed orders perfectly.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Dumbass, pointing out your rank hypocrisy doesn't make us hypocrites

You know how much bullshit is in that post? Of course you don't.

All you do is exercise mental compartmentalism, you try to seal yourself off from the consequences of your own hypocrisy by trying to point out other people's supposed hypocrisy.

In other words, you are projecting.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Funny. You don’t have a problem with “libtard” In that post. Are you saying you aren’t convinced Hilary is guilty and Flynn is not? You are just as biased as the rest of us.

Nope.

I have a problem with anyone who thinks it is cool to say "libtard" or "conservatard." It makes you, and it makes them look puerile.

Now, I have seen all the evidence regarding Hillary's malfeasance. The evidence is all there. It is convincing. I didn't just sit there watching Hannity or other conservative pundits say "she's guilty" and automatically assume her guilt. I did research, I looked behind their claims. I researched all the relevant laws and precedents for her behavior. From an objective stance, she should be in handcuffs for what she did. But Democrats like you, instead of attempting to hold her accountable, decided to excuse her instead. No objectivity whatsoever. No concern for the law, just for your chosen one.

As for Flynn, I also did the same thing. In the beginning, I thought he deserved to be fired for lying to the Vice President. So I went on my merry way. Fast forward 3 years and the ODNI declassifies all of these documents, in which agents are conspiring to get him to lie under oath. I was outraged, Coyote. Not only was he unmasked, it is clear to me that Joe Biden (or one of his staffers), leaked his name to the Washington Post, which on its own is a crime (see 18 U.S.C. § 798 (a) (1)). He was a victim of rank corruption within what is supposed to be the most revered law enforcement agency in the world.

 

[Coyote]

....and how many investigations did you launch against Hilary?.......conservatards.

"Conservatards"?

Do you realize you discredited your entire argument simply by using that term?

Also, who is "you"?

Do not lecture me about bias. Okay? Given how you're so convinced Flynn is guilty but Hillary was not. Please spare me.

Funny. You don’t have a problem with “libtard” In that post. Are you saying you aren’t convinced Hilary is guilty and Flynn is not? Because that is what it sounds like.

Funny. You don’t have a problem with “libtard” In that post. Are you saying you aren’t convinced Hilary is guilty and Flynn is not? You are just as biased as the rest of us.

Nope.

I have a problem with anyone who thinks it is cool to say "libtard" or "conservatard." It makes you, and it makes them look puerile.

I get sick of it frankly, and ya, sometimes dish it back. I haven't noticed you calling out the libtarders.

Now, I have seen all the evidence regarding Hillary's malfeasance. The evidence is all there. It is convincing. I didn't just sit there watching Hannity or other conservative pundits say "she's guilty" and automatically assume her guilt. I did research, I looked behind their claims. I researched all the relevant laws and precedents for her behavior. From an objective stance, she should be in handcuffs for what she did. But Democrats like you, instead of attempting to hold her accountable, decided to excuse her instead. No objectivity whatsoever. No concern for the law, just for your chosen one.

So have I and I came to a different conclusion. The only thing she did wrong was use a server, something Colin Powell actually recommended. She also has a (deserved) reputation for being pretty techtarded. Given that, and that a thorough investigation (instituted by the Republican Congress) couldn't come up with anything much, I tend to agree with Comey's assessment that "no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute it" because it lacks intent.

As for Flynn, I also did the same thing. In the beginning, I thought he deserved to be fired for lying to the Vice President. So I went on my merry way. Fast forward 3 years and the ODNI declassifies all of these documents, in which agents are conspiring to get him to lie under oath. I was outraged, Coyote. Not only was he unmasked, it is clear to me that Joe Biden (or one of his staffers), leaked his name to the Washington Post, which on its own is a crime (see 18 U.S.C. § 798 (a) (1)). He was a victim of rank corruption within what is supposed to be the most revered law enforcement agency in the world.

I did the same thing. Only, my conclusions haven't changed. If I look at this rationally I have to ask:

1. Has EVERYTHING been released? (For example unredacted Mueller, Grand Jury testimony, ALL the related FBI files) OR is there a partisan slant in choosing what to release?

2. Given that neither of us has seen everything related to the case, but the Judge has, and declined to allow withdrawal of the plea, and stated that there was no alterations of the substantive changes to the 302 forms and pretty much through out the defense claims, I'm inclined to go with the judge's opinion. He knows the law and has seen all the evidence. WE do not really, and have not.

3. Corruption. Again, I have seen no evidence of it beyond conspiracy theory hype. Keep in mind too that the Obama was concerned enough about Flynn they notified the incoming Trump administration and provided the documentation.

I've approached it in as logical a manner as you, came to different conclusions, yet you label my view as all about hating Trump and "emotion". That seems to be the default accusation towards anyone who disagrees with the pro-Flynn side.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I've approached it in as logical a manner as you, came to different conclusions, yet you label my view as all about hating Trump and "emotion".

Forgive my lack of tact, but anyone who makes an argument without citing facts is making an emotional argument. Arguments fueled by emotion instead of facts or logic are invalid.

And just like you did, I have to acknowledge your biases and incorporate them into my arguments. I see lots of emotion in politics, rarely any reason.

 

[Coyote]

I've approached it in as logical a manner as you, came to different conclusions, yet you label my view as all about hating Trump and "emotion".

Forgive my lack of tact, but anyone who makes an argument without citing facts is making an emotional argument. Arguments fueled by emotion instead of facts or logic are invalid.

I cite facts when I need to.

Do you?

And just like you did, I have to acknowledge your biases and incorporate them into my arguments. I see lots of emotion in politics, rarely any reason.

I'm sorry TK, I really like you, but I see no difference in your approach - it is no less emotional. I don't think you are on firm ground accusing others (who do not share your conclusions based on the evidence) to be arguing from emotion.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I get sick of it frankly, and ya, sometimes dish it back. I haven't noticed you calling out the libtarders.

Moreover, Coyote. I don't call them out because I am solely focused on talking to you, not starting a flame war with everyone in the thread. It's not because I am being selective, I am merely devoting my focus and concentration to our discussion, not their statements.

 

[Coyote]

I get sick of it frankly, and ya, sometimes dish it back. I haven't noticed you calling out the libtarders.

Moreover, Coyote. I don't call them out because I am solely focused on talking to you, not starting a flame war with everyone in the thread. It's not because I am being selective, I am merely devoting my focus and concentration to our discussion, not their statements.

You call me out, in a response that is to another member....who utilized "libtard"....your tactic confuses me since that convo wasn't with you.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I'm sorry TK, I really like you, but I see no difference in your approach - it is no less emotional.

If you say so. I never said to eliminate emotion from your arguments, I am simply suggesting you back emotions with facts and evidence. If the facts don't match your emotions, remove the emotions and cite the facts.

Do you see my sig?

"Emotions tell you what you believe, they do not tell you what is true."

I had to adopt that approach when I discovered my bisexuality. (That's another topic entirely).

 

[TemplarKormac]

You call me out, in a response that is to another member....who utilized "libtard"....your tactic confuses me since that convo wasn't with you.

I'm not picking and choosing who I call out. I am focused only on our discussion. Only. I do not read the whole chain when I reply to anyone's comments. I only do that if I need to acquire context. Namely, because I am disinterested in the name-calling that might be taking place in it. I am looking for levelheaded statements, not eruptions of spitefulness.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I cite facts when I need to.

Do you?

Whenever I get the chance, Coyote. Some arguments need facts, while others need emotion. Whilst others require a combination of both.

 

[Coyote]

I cite facts when I need to.

Do you?

Whenever I get the chance, Coyote. Some arguments need facts, while others need emotion. Whilst others require a combination of both.

Well, in that, I agree.

 

[Coyote]

You call me out, in a response that is to another member....who utilized "libtard"....your tactic confuses me since that convo wasn't with you.

I'm not picking and choosing who I call out. I am focused only on our discussion. Only. I do not read the whole chain when I reply to anyone's comments. I only do that if I need to acquire context. Namely, because I am disinterested in the name-calling that might be taking place in it. I am looking for levelheaded statements, not eruptions of spitefulness.

Context often matters.