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

[postman]

They had intercept a call between Flynn and a Russian ambassador discussing Obama's sanctions. That's a potential violation of the Logan Act.

Actually I believe they intercepted three calls between Flynn and Kislyak. With Flynn making the first call, Kiskyak the second and Flynn the third.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They don’t need to damage an investigation. When people are being interviewed and lie about things it wastes time and resources and it obstructs the investigation.

Yes, they really need to damage or obstruct a real investigation to be material.
What was the investigation concerning the phone calls?

there is a penalty because facts that may seem insignificant to the person being questioned may be relevant to the case.

There was no case.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They had intercept a call between Flynn and a Russian ambassador discussing Obama's sanctions. That's a potential violation of the Logan Act.

They had intercept a call between Flynn and a Russian ambassador discussing Obama's sanctions. That's a potential violation of the Logan Act.

Incoming administrations are allowed to contact foreign officials.

If every discussion where the new administration differs from the old is going to result in a Logan Act investigation, we're going to need a lot more agents.

 

[Faun]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

 

[Slade3200]

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

We're not discussing cops just 'talking' to people.

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

Nice cherry picking and ignoring all the other exculpatory evidence.

During normal conversations you make actual counter arguments by bringing up the stuff your accusing me of leaving out so I can then respond in agreement or disagreement on whether it’s relevant.

You're cherry picking again. Why can't you consider all the evidence I have shown you? You seem to zero in on esoteric information that bolsters your arguments. It makes me think you are just being contrary only for the sake of arguing.

What point do you want me to acknowledge Leo? That the FBI wanted to catch Flynn in a lie to use it as leverage to get more information? Cause that definitely happened. You think it is the signal of some deep state conspiracy to overthrow the president. I don’t. Am I missing something else?

Yes. The fact you can't see what was going on speaks volumes about your bias. You missed most everything and did not address any of the points I posted.

What point do you want to discuss? Let’s do one at a time. Go ahead

All of them, apparently you are a one trick pony. I posted more than one point. 12 to be exact. None of which you have addressed in any way shape or form. I even linked it for you. I think each bullet point has a link. But I realize your 'Orange Man Bad' brainwashing prohibits you from logical thinking.

I’m just not one to write novels as posts on this board. Shit gets lost and overlooked that way. How about you pick a specific point you want me to address and I’ll address it.

Cherry picking again? Are you not capable more than one thought at a time?

I don’t think you understand what cherry picking means. I’m offering to discuss your points one at a time and asking you to pick the one you want to discuss. Barfing out a dozen points would require a novel of a response and too much opportunity to gloss over points instead of digging in. It’s much easier to get to the heart of a topic if you disect one element at a time. Why aren’t you picking one and engaging?

 

[Slade3200]

They don’t need to damage an investigation. When people are being interviewed and lie about things it wastes time and resources and it obstructs the investigation.

Yes, they really need to damage or obstruct a real investigation to be material.
What was the investigation concerning the phone calls?

there is a penalty because facts that may seem insignificant to the person being questioned may be relevant to the case.

There was no case.

I’ve already answered these questions. You don’t seem to agree with my answers. That’s fine. I’m not interested in listening to your broken record again.

 

[Slade3200]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

After Flynn’s interview Trumps appointed acting AG hired Mueller to embark on an enormous investigation into Russian election interference with the Trump campaign. For some retarded reason Todd here can’t understand why conversations between Flynn and the Russians are relevant or why Flynn lying about conversations is relevant.... its like trying to teach a kid that dirt is dirty. It’s so damn obvious but at this point I’m convinced that he is just here trolling so don’t get too invested in trying to explain this stuff to him.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

I wonder what was expected. Rump got off scot free on other High Crimes and ...... He's making sure that his merry band of criminals are protected. Look for him to do even more along these lines like pardons and having clean cut convictions thrown out. Mafia Don Rump can't do anything else.

 

[Meister]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

I wonder what was expected. Rump got off scot free on other High Crimes and ...... He's making sure that his merry band of criminals are protected. Look for him to do even more along these lines like pardons and having clean cut convictions thrown out. Mafia Don Rump can't do anything else.

I just hope that the democrats including Obama get theirs. Looks like it's leaning that way, thanks to Durham

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that.

Intent? Either he violated the Logan Act or he didn't.

Perfectly legit.

Not if the intent was to investigate election interference.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They don’t need to damage an investigation. When people are being interviewed and lie about things it wastes time and resources and it obstructs the investigation.

Yes, they really need to damage or obstruct a real investigation to be material.
What was the investigation concerning the phone calls?

there is a penalty because facts that may seem insignificant to the person being questioned may be relevant to the case.

There was no case.

I’ve already answered these questions. You don’t seem to agree with my answers. That’s fine. I’m not interested in listening to your broken record again.

Yes, your answers show you don't understand what legitimate, relevant and obstruct mean.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

After Flynn’s interview Trumps appointed acting AG hired Mueller to embark on an enormous investigation into Russian election interference with the Trump campaign. For some retarded reason Todd here can’t understand why conversations between Flynn and the Russians are relevant or why Flynn lying about conversations is relevant.... its like trying to teach a kid that dirt is dirty. It’s so damn obvious but at this point I’m convinced that he is just here trolling so don’t get too invested in trying to explain this stuff to him.

Todd here can’t understand why conversations between Flynn and the Russians are relevant

Why are non-election related calls relevant to the election investigation?

Flynn lying about conversations is relevant...

He didn't lie about the election.

 

[Leo123]

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

We're not discussing cops just 'talking' to people.

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

Nice cherry picking and ignoring all the other exculpatory evidence.

During normal conversations you make actual counter arguments by bringing up the stuff your accusing me of leaving out so I can then respond in agreement or disagreement on whether it’s relevant.

You're cherry picking again. Why can't you consider all the evidence I have shown you? You seem to zero in on esoteric information that bolsters your arguments. It makes me think you are just being contrary only for the sake of arguing.

What point do you want me to acknowledge Leo? That the FBI wanted to catch Flynn in a lie to use it as leverage to get more information? Cause that definitely happened. You think it is the signal of some deep state conspiracy to overthrow the president. I don’t. Am I missing something else?

Yes. The fact you can't see what was going on speaks volumes about your bias. You missed most everything and did not address any of the points I posted.

What point do you want to discuss? Let’s do one at a time. Go ahead

All of them, apparently you are a one trick pony. I posted more than one point. 12 to be exact. None of which you have addressed in any way shape or form. I even linked it for you. I think each bullet point has a link. But I realize your 'Orange Man Bad' brainwashing prohibits you from logical thinking.

I’m just not one to write novels as posts on this board. Shit gets lost and overlooked that way. How about you pick a specific point you want me to address and I’ll address it.

Cherry picking again? Are you not capable more than one thought at a time?

I don’t think you understand what cherry picking means. I’m offering to discuss your points one at a time and asking you to pick the one you want to discuss. Barfing out a dozen points would require a novel of a response and too much opportunity to gloss over points instead of digging in. It’s much easier to get to the heart of a topic if you disect one element at a time. Why aren’t you picking one and engaging?

Slade here can’t seem to handle more than one thought at a time.

 

[Slade3200]

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

We're not discussing cops just 'talking' to people.

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

Nice cherry picking and ignoring all the other exculpatory evidence.

During normal conversations you make actual counter arguments by bringing up the stuff your accusing me of leaving out so I can then respond in agreement or disagreement on whether it’s relevant.

You're cherry picking again. Why can't you consider all the evidence I have shown you? You seem to zero in on esoteric information that bolsters your arguments. It makes me think you are just being contrary only for the sake of arguing.

What point do you want me to acknowledge Leo? That the FBI wanted to catch Flynn in a lie to use it as leverage to get more information? Cause that definitely happened. You think it is the signal of some deep state conspiracy to overthrow the president. I don’t. Am I missing something else?

Yes. The fact you can't see what was going on speaks volumes about your bias. You missed most everything and did not address any of the points I posted.

What point do you want to discuss? Let’s do one at a time. Go ahead

All of them, apparently you are a one trick pony. I posted more than one point. 12 to be exact. None of which you have addressed in any way shape or form. I even linked it for you. I think each bullet point has a link. But I realize your 'Orange Man Bad' brainwashing prohibits you from logical thinking.

I’m just not one to write novels as posts on this board. Shit gets lost and overlooked that way. How about you pick a specific point you want me to address and I’ll address it.

Cherry picking again? Are you not capable more than one thought at a time?

I don’t think you understand what cherry picking means. I’m offering to discuss your points one at a time and asking you to pick the one you want to discuss. Barfing out a dozen points would require a novel of a response and too much opportunity to gloss over points instead of digging in. It’s much easier to get to the heart of a topic if you disect one element at a time. Why aren’t you picking one and engaging?

Slade here can’t seem to handle more than one thought at a time.

You seem to not be able to handle discussing one topic in detail. Verbal diarrhea may be your thing... but flooding the Zone never goes anywhere. Maybe that’s your objective huh?

 

[Leo123]

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

We're not discussing cops just 'talking' to people.

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

Nice cherry picking and ignoring all the other exculpatory evidence.

During normal conversations you make actual counter arguments by bringing up the stuff your accusing me of leaving out so I can then respond in agreement or disagreement on whether it’s relevant.

You're cherry picking again. Why can't you consider all the evidence I have shown you? You seem to zero in on esoteric information that bolsters your arguments. It makes me think you are just being contrary only for the sake of arguing.

What point do you want me to acknowledge Leo? That the FBI wanted to catch Flynn in a lie to use it as leverage to get more information? Cause that definitely happened. You think it is the signal of some deep state conspiracy to overthrow the president. I don’t. Am I missing something else?

Yes. The fact you can't see what was going on speaks volumes about your bias. You missed most everything and did not address any of the points I posted.

What point do you want to discuss? Let’s do one at a time. Go ahead

All of them, apparently you are a one trick pony. I posted more than one point. 12 to be exact. None of which you have addressed in any way shape or form. I even linked it for you. I think each bullet point has a link. But I realize your 'Orange Man Bad' brainwashing prohibits you from logical thinking.

I’m just not one to write novels as posts on this board. Shit gets lost and overlooked that way. How about you pick a specific point you want me to address and I’ll address it.

Cherry picking again? Are you not capable more than one thought at a time?

I don’t think you understand what cherry picking means. I’m offering to discuss your points one at a time and asking you to pick the one you want to discuss. Barfing out a dozen points would require a novel of a response and too much opportunity to gloss over points instead of digging in. It’s much easier to get to the heart of a topic if you disect one element at a time. Why aren’t you picking one and engaging?

Slade here can’t seem to handle more than one thought at a time.

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

We're not discussing cops just 'talking' to people.

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

Nice cherry picking and ignoring all the other exculpatory evidence.

During normal conversations you make actual counter arguments by bringing up the stuff your accusing me of leaving out so I can then respond in agreement or disagreement on whether it’s relevant.

You're cherry picking again. Why can't you consider all the evidence I have shown you? You seem to zero in on esoteric information that bolsters your arguments. It makes me think you are just being contrary only for the sake of arguing.

What point do you want me to acknowledge Leo? That the FBI wanted to catch Flynn in a lie to use it as leverage to get more information? Cause that definitely happened. You think it is the signal of some deep state conspiracy to overthrow the president. I don’t. Am I missing something else?

Yes. The fact you can't see what was going on speaks volumes about your bias. You missed most everything and did not address any of the points I posted.

What point do you want to discuss? Let’s do one at a time. Go ahead

All of them, apparently you are a one trick pony. I posted more than one point. 12 to be exact. None of which you have addressed in any way shape or form. I even linked it for you. I think each bullet point has a link. But I realize your 'Orange Man Bad' brainwashing prohibits you from logical thinking.

I’m just not one to write novels as posts on this board. Shit gets lost and overlooked that way. How about you pick a specific point you want me to address and I’ll address it.

Cherry picking again? Are you not capable more than one thought at a time?

I don’t think you understand what cherry picking means. I’m offering to discuss your points one at a time and asking you to pick the one you want to discuss. Barfing out a dozen points would require a novel of a response and too much opportunity to gloss over points instead of digging in. It’s much easier to get to the heart of a topic if you disect one element at a time. Why aren’t you picking one and engaging?

Slade here can’t seem to handle more than one thought at a time.

You seem to not be able to handle discussing one topic in detail. Verbal diarrhea may be your thing... but flooding the Zone never goes anywhere. Maybe that’s your objective huh?

And you seem to not be able to handle discussing more complex concepts.

 

[Faun]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that.

Intent? Either he violated the Logan Act or he didn't.

Perfectly legit.

Not if the intent was to investigate election interference.

Intent is required.

Investigating connections to Russians was legit.

 

[iceberg]

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

We're not discussing cops just 'talking' to people.

If you think there is something improper for cops to ask questions they know the answer to to see if the subject is being honest or not then I don’t know what to tell ya.

There was nothing illegal in the phone call. No legitimate reason to ask him about the call.

You're talking in circles Todd, we’ve been through this. You’re point does not land. Cops can talk to people with whom they don’t have evidence of crimes

Nice cherry picking and ignoring all the other exculpatory evidence.

During normal conversations you make actual counter arguments by bringing up the stuff your accusing me of leaving out so I can then respond in agreement or disagreement on whether it’s relevant.

You're cherry picking again. Why can't you consider all the evidence I have shown you? You seem to zero in on esoteric information that bolsters your arguments. It makes me think you are just being contrary only for the sake of arguing.

What point do you want me to acknowledge Leo? That the FBI wanted to catch Flynn in a lie to use it as leverage to get more information? Cause that definitely happened. You think it is the signal of some deep state conspiracy to overthrow the president. I don’t. Am I missing something else?

Yes. The fact you can't see what was going on speaks volumes about your bias. You missed most everything and did not address any of the points I posted.

What point do you want to discuss? Let’s do one at a time. Go ahead

All of them, apparently you are a one trick pony. I posted more than one point. 12 to be exact. None of which you have addressed in any way shape or form. I even linked it for you. I think each bullet point has a link. But I realize your 'Orange Man Bad' brainwashing prohibits you from logical thinking.

I’m just not one to write novels as posts on this board. Shit gets lost and overlooked that way. How about you pick a specific point you want me to address and I’ll address it.

Cherry picking again? Are you not capable more than one thought at a time?

I don’t think you understand what cherry picking means. I’m offering to discuss your points one at a time and asking you to pick the one you want to discuss. Barfing out a dozen points would require a novel of a response and too much opportunity to gloss over points instead of digging in. It’s much easier to get to the heart of a topic if you disect one element at a time. Why aren’t you picking one and engaging?

Slade here can’t seem to handle more than one thought at a time.

You seem to not be able to handle discussing one topic in detail. Verbal diarrhea may be your thing... but flooding the Zone never goes anywhere. Maybe that’s your objective huh?

BULLSHIT ALERT.

i gave you a TON of detail it took me an hour to put together and you dismissed it with bripats reply as my own for "expediency" sake.

so go **** your own arrogant ass, beuler buford.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that.

Intent? Either he violated the Logan Act or he didn't.

Perfectly legit.

Not if the intent was to investigate election interference.

Intent is required.

Investigating connections to Russians was legit.

No illegitimate connections in the Flynn calls.
Nothing election related.

 

[Faun]

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

That makes bo sense

Asking questions is not setting traps.

That's wishful bull shit! Perjury trap - Wikipedia
The principle is well known...to everyone but you.

Flynn lied on his own free will

The FBI was perfectly aware they were entrapping Flynn and had to be careful about it.

Documents show FBI debated how to handle investigation of Michael Flynn

The four pages reflect bureau brainstorming about how to approach the Trump adviser’s contacts with the Russian ambassador.

www.politico.com

Ok so per your link this is what you are whining about?

“A perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath). Courts on state and federal levels almost never recognize such as inappropriate, doing so would in essence, condone perjury.”

If you could just shut the media's mouth, and stop the leaks, the case may have stood, but the get Trump threats by the media in their gotcha now bullcrap (revealing methods and traps), just keeps backfiring and backfiring. Any day now.. rotflmbo.

The media have always been dishonest turfs. It’s not that hard to stay out of that vortex. Either way, our leaders should rise above, not stoop down to their level or in Trumps case... go below. It’s an embarrassment

Really? One would not know you thought the media was dishonest because your posts parrot what they say about Trump. The fact that Trump holds then to account IS rising above their distortions and lies.

if the media says the same stuff that im sayIng then that stuff is accurate. The media is mixed bag of accurate, hyperbolic and dishonest reporting.

The leftist shit 'bag' media says the same things you do. The same shit bag media that follows liars like Hillary, Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi and any other TDS politician and that parrots them. You parrot THOSE bags of shit.

I don’t parrot shit, I call it like I see it... I can’t help it if trump and his puppets call everything a lie.

No one called 'everything a lie' that is an irresponsible blanket statement. The same kind of statement the lamestream media makes and you're here squawking out the same shit.

Yes I agree not everything is anything. So why are you wasting time trying to say I’m parroting lies from the media? How about you just stick the the things I say and refute what you can if you can

I have already refuted what you posted. You keep parroting the same media talking points. There was a concerted effort to get rid of Flynn. The FBI did not use protocol when interviewing Flynn, they told him he did not need a lawyer, they pretended it was just a chat, did not offer his Miranda rights and memos have surfaced they were trying to get him to lie about information they already had. Also Obama was in on it. Now, you say none of that is a big deal but given everything that the Democrats have tried, it fits right in with with their conspiracy to unseat Trump. You had a US Representative (Adam Schiff) reading what he purported to be a transcript of Trump's Ukraine call and outright lying about what was said. You had Shumer and Pelosi declaring that Trump was 'unfit'......Also Obama fired Flynn for coming down hard on radical Muslims. What was he doing wanting to be 'in the loop' in the FBI's 'Razor' scheme? Flynn did noting wrong and was representing the new administration and to powerful Democrats that was enough to set him up. The FBI had no cause to investigate him they just wanted him out of the way.

Dude you lie in your first sentence. They told him he could bring a lawyer. That’s a fact, stop acting like they tricked him, stop lying! Flynn said in court that the FBI did not trap him and he knew the consequences of lying. Jesus Christ. Stop spreading fake shit! Flynn lied by choice not by force. He has a history of it. The FBI tried and leverage that lie to get as much info as they could. You may think they pushed to hard... that’s fine, we can have that debate. But come back to ******* earth.

No, you're lying, "Comey also says officials told Flynn the interview would be faster without one." You did not tell the whole truth you just spewed half-assed propaganda with no regard at all to the facts at the time.

"In court documents filed Thursday, the Justice Department said that after reviewing newly disclosed information and other materials, it agreed with Flynn’s lawyers that his interview with the FBI should never have taken place. His contacts with the Russian ambassador were “entirely appropriate” and the interview “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis,” the department said. "

"Flynn in his filing claimed that “I never would have pled guilty” if his first set of lawyers had told him that FBI agents wrote that he had a “sure demeanor” and “did not give any indication of deception” in a report they prepared after questioning him about the nature of his conversations with then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"Instead, Flynn said that “I tried to ‘accept responsibility’ by admitting to offenses I understood the government I love and trusted said I committed.”

You are dead wrong, the facts do not support what you claim. Flynn committed no crime in talking to Kysliak. Exculpatory evidence was withheld at his trial. It was a set up pure and simple. Those in the FBI should be held responsible for a miscarriage of justice.

Ok let’s get very specific here. The agents said they offered him council but said it would slow things down. That’s is the absolute truth isn’t it? Is anything in that statement a lie?

Why did they discourage him from having council by saying the interview would go quicker? The only reason for that is to try to set up a trap. Why did they not afford him the same consideration as anyone else? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld at the trial? Do you just follow like a sheep to slaughter as long as your TDS is satisfied? What was the crime they were investigating?

It’s not a trap! That’s a buzz word you keep using. Flynn knew his rights, he knew he could have a lawyer and he knew lying was a crime.... he did it anyways, nobody forced him. Of course the cops would rather there not be an attorney present, and of course they would like to exposed a lie or admission to used against Flynn. That’s what cops do during investigations. Do you have any clue how law enforcement works?

That’s what cops do during investigations.

Why were the cops investigating that phone call?

Because it could have been a violation of the Logan Act.

They should have charged him, they had the transcript.
Zero need for an interview.

They chose to interview him. Nothing wrong with that.

And no good reason for it either.

Sure there was. To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

To get additional information about why he was talking to a Russian ambassador and who authorized him to do so.

He's the incoming NSA.

So? Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government. He did so anyway. The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

Before becoming the NSA, he was just a citizen with no authority to act on behalf of the USA's government.

It's perfectly legal for members of an incoming administration to contact foreign governments.

The FBI was right to investigate the matter.

They investigated.
A week after the call they found no derogatory info and were going to drop the case.

Oh? Who authorized Flynn to discuss Obama's sanctions with Russia?

He needed authorization? LOL!

According to the law, yes.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.​

I guess they should have charged him then.

They had the transcripts. Why didn't they?

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that. So they went to question him about it. Perfectly legit.

They needed to be able to prove intent. The phone call alone didn't provide that.

Intent? Either he violated the Logan Act or he didn't.

Perfectly legit.

Not if the intent was to investigate election interference.

Intent is required.

Investigating connections to Russians was legit.

No illegitimate connections in the Flynn calls.
Nothing election related.

Russian connection related. Legit.