Flynn

[spence]

Duh duh dummmmmmmm.....

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

Duh duh dummmmmmmm.....

He has reportedly plead to lying to FBI. Still nothing that confirms collusion.

I want this investigation confirmed one way or the other, legit, least amount of politics as possible.

[Got Stripers]

I can't wait for this to be finalized, it's so painful to watch all this posturing.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

He has reportedly plead to lying to FBI. Still nothing that confirms collusion.

I want this investigation confirmed one way or the other, legit, least amount of politics as possible.

You know better than this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Where is the outrage?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnR

I want this investigation confirmed one way or the other, legit, least amount of politics as possible.

this is entirely the result of Obama/Clinton politicization of the FBI

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

this is entirely the result of Obama/Clinton politicization of the FBI

No... it has everything to do with Flynn lying to the FBI and the administration claiming no one spoke to the Russians

But Trump supports are so loyal it wont matter truth has never mattered

[Sea Dangles]

I love the feigned outrage from the left. A selective group with short memories I would say.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Duke41]

Mike Flynn could be the new Ollie North.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

I love the feigned outrage from the left. A selective group with short memories I would say.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

what selective group memories are you suggesting ?

no outrage.. just living in the present along with the facts as they appear ... and waiting to see the next shoe to drop

[spence]

Originally Posted by wdmso

what selective group memories are you suggesting ?

To some, Clinton's improper use of private email is the same thing as colluding with the enemy to undermine your own government.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

colluding with the enemy to undermine your own government.

pretty big stretch there...you've been overly dramatic lately

[PaulS]

So Trump fired Flynn because he lied to the FBI then fired Comey for investigating that lie?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So Trump fired Flynn because he lied to the FBI then fired Comey for investigating that lie?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think Comey went away for incompetence...that seemed to be the bi-partisan review of his job performance...Flynn went away for optics, sounds like he's pleading guilty to a speeding ticket which is funny considering the bluster

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

pretty big stretch there...you've been overly dramatic lately

Seems like you have two examples already proven. Will be interesting to see how many more come to light.

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

I think Comey went away for incompetence...that seemed to be the bi-partisan review of his job performance...Flynn went away for optics, sounds like he's pleading guilty to a speeding ticket which is funny considering the bluster

0 for 3.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Seems like you have two examples already proven. Will be interesting to see how many more come to light.

I hope so for your sake...

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

To some, Clinton's improper use of private email is the same thing as colluding with the enemy to undermine your own government.

Define enemy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

0 for 3.

Prominent liberals and conservatives states comet wasn’t up to the job. He was right on that.

If you didn’t want an investigation of Hilary, or looked for every conceivablenreason to giver her a pass, then unless you do the same with Flynn, there’s some hypocrisy there.

I wanted Hilary investigated, I want Flynn investigated. We need people with better ethical standards, we really do, and that applies to both sides.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

I just listened to a former democrat congressman explain that there has been no collusion demonstrated...there is not likely to be any collusion demonstrated and that his hope and expectation was that Trump, going forward would do something that could be construed as obstruction of justice, reminding us of 1972, and then they could nail him....this is just sad

[scottw]

here's the REAL question...if Flynn testifies that he identifies as an illegal immigrant....will they just let him go?

[GattaFish]

Originally Posted by scottw

here's the REAL question...if Flynn testifies that he identifies as an illegal immigrant....will they just let him go?

Nope. He’s not in a sanctuary city.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

✔
@realDonaldTrump
Tainted (no, very dishonest?) FBI “agent’s role in Clinton probe under review.” Led Clinton Email probe. @foxandfriends Clinton money going to wife of another FBI agent in charge.

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
After years of Comey, with the phony and dishonest Clinton investigation (and more), running the FBI, its reputation is in Tatters - worst in History! But fear not, we will bring it back to greatness.
The president seized on the officer's dismissal, tweeting: "Report:

'ANTI-TRUMP FBI AGENT LED CLINTON EMAIL PROBE' Now it all starts to make sense!"


A spokesman for Mr Mueller said the officer was dismissed from the investigating team as soon as the messages were discovered.


Another example of a trump trying the discredit his own FBI (as Fake news) and who says he is not an Authoritarian .he has no time for the rule of law unless it falls on his side

[scottw]

sounds like it's a real mess over there...

U.S. House Republicans are drafting a contempt of Congress resolution against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray, claiming stonewalling in producing material related to the Russia-Trump probes and other matters.

Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes and other committee Republicans, after considering such action for several weeks, decided to move after media including the New York Times reported Saturday on why a top FBI official assigned to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of Russia-Trump election collusion had been removed from the investigation.

“a months-long pattern by the DOJ and FBI of stonewalling and obstructing this Committee’s oversight work,” including also withholding subpoenaed information about their use of an opposition research dossier that targeted Trump in the 2016 election.


maybe Trump can 'Make the FBI Great Again"

[Jim in CT]

Let’s all watch ABC to get the straight scoop on what’s happening with this story.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

typical democrats..there should be an investigation of democrat criminal hackery ..talk about "collusion"

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/by...rticle/2642434

The documents outlining Michael Flynn's guilty plea in the Trump-Russia investigation do not allege collusion or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the 2016 election. They do, however, suggest that the Obama Justice Department was intensely interested in Flynn's discussions with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak about policy issues — sanctions against Russia, a United Nations resolution on Israel — during the presidential transition, when Barack Obama was still in the White House and Donald Trump was preparing to take office.

At the time, top Justice officials suspected Flynn of violating the Logan Act, the 218-year-old law under which no one has ever been prosecuted.

In short, there's no doubt the Logan Act, a law dismissed as a joke or an archaic irrelevancy or simply unconstitutional by many legal experts, played a central role in the Obama administration's aggressive and enormously consequential investigation of its successor.

Democrats began accusing Trump of Logan Act violations in the summer of 2016, immediately after the Republican convention.

There wasn't much public discussion of the Logan Act in October and November, as the campaign reached its final weeks and the political world dealt with the shock of Trump's victory. The subject re-emerged in December as Democrats, stunned and angry, watched Trump prepare for the presidency — and prepare to undo many of Obama's policies.

On Dec. 8, Democratic Rep. Jared Huffman introduced the "One President at a Time Act of 2016." The bill would have amended the Logan Act to specify that a president-elect, or anyone acting on a president-elect's behalf, was specifically subject to its restrictions.

On Dec. 20, Reps. Conyers and Sheila Jackson Lee asked the Justice Department to investigate Trump for a possible violation of the Logan Act.

A critical moment came two weeks later, on Jan. 12, 2017, when the Washington Post's David Ignatius reported the Flynn-Kislyak calls. Ignatius said his source was a "senior U.S. government official." "What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions?" Ignatius asked. "The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about 'disputes' with the United States."

It was a stunning leak; the existence and content of U.S. spy intercepts are highly, highly classified. But the Obama administration let the information out.

And by the way, when it finally came time to charge Flynn with a crime, did prosecutors, armed with the transcripts of those Flynn-Kislyak conversations, choose to charge him with violating the Logan Act? Of course not. But for the Obama team, the law had already served its purpose, months earlier, to entangle the new administration in a criminal investigation as soon as it walkedin the door of the White House.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

But Trump supports are so loyal it wont matter truth has never mattered

and just to reiterate...I don't like Trump...don't think many here do ....that does not make the democrat habit of use of government through any means necessary to maintain and promote their agenda any less despicable... I judge Trump on a level playing field of rules the democrats themselves have established....hopefully, post-Trump there will be a rekindling of spirit and respect for the laws and tradition that keep all parties in check...that is lost for now as the end justifies the means clearly rules the day....


now on to obstruction...did you get the memo in your inbox yet?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

and just to reiterate...I don't like Trump...don't think many here do ....that does not make the democrat habit of use of government through any means necessary to maintain and promote their agenda any less despicable... I judge Trump on a level playing field of rules the democrats themselves have established....hopefully, post-Trump there will be a rekindling of spirit and respect for the laws and tradition that keep all parties in check...that is lost for now as the end justifies the means clearly rules the day....


now on to obstruction...did you get the memo in your inbox yet?

you as well as other appear that there is no collusion.. but the case is on going 2 guilty pleas and counting and as for obstruction he is tweeting his way right into that one .. or is that another false possibility ...

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

typical democrats..there should be an investigation of democrat criminal hackery ..talk about "collusion"

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/by...rticle/2642434

The documents outlining Michael Flynn's guilty plea in the Trump-Russia investigation do not allege collusion or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the 2016 election. They do, however, suggest that the Obama Justice Department was intensely interested in Flynn's discussions with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak about policy issues — sanctions against Russia, a United Nations resolution on Israel — during the presidential transition, when Barack Obama was still in the White House and Donald Trump was preparing to take office.

At the time, top Justice officials suspected Flynn of violating the Logan Act, the 218-year-old law under which no one has ever been prosecuted.

In short, there's no doubt the Logan Act, a law dismissed as a joke or an archaic irrelevancy or simply unconstitutional by many legal experts, played a central role in the Obama administration's aggressive and enormously consequential investigation of its successor.

Democrats began accusing Trump of Logan Act violations in the summer of 2016, immediately after the Republican convention.

There wasn't much public discussion of the Logan Act in October and November, as the campaign reached its final weeks and the political world dealt with the shock of Trump's victory. The subject re-emerged in December as Democrats, stunned and angry, watched Trump prepare for the presidency — and prepare to undo many of Obama's policies.

On Dec. 8, Democratic Rep. Jared Huffman introduced the "One President at a Time Act of 2016." The bill would have amended the Logan Act to specify that a president-elect, or anyone acting on a president-elect's behalf, was specifically subject to its restrictions.

On Dec. 20, Reps. Conyers and Sheila Jackson Lee asked the Justice Department to investigate Trump for a possible violation of the Logan Act.

A critical moment came two weeks later, on Jan. 12, 2017, when the Washington Post's David Ignatius reported the Flynn-Kislyak calls. Ignatius said his source was a "senior U.S. government official." "What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions?" Ignatius asked. "The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about 'disputes' with the United States."

It was a stunning leak; the existence and content of U.S. spy intercepts are highly, highly classified. But the Obama administration let the information out.

And by the way, when it finally came time to charge Flynn with a crime, did prosecutors, armed with the transcripts of those Flynn-Kislyak conversations, choose to charge him with violating the Logan Act? Of course not. But for the Obama team, the law had already served its purpose, months earlier, to entangle the new administration in a criminal investigation as soon as it walkedin the door of the White House.

tin foil hats in fashion once again

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

you as well as other appear that there is no collusion.. but the case is on going 2 guilty pleas and counting and as for obstruction he is tweeting his way right into that one .. or is that another false possibility ...

Here is a sincere question, not a sarcastic wise-ass comment...

Collusion between whom? For what purpose?

When Flynn met with Russians (which he lied about, and deserves to be punished for that because he knows better), was he working for Trump at the time?