Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

When MSNBC announced Trump's win in Iowa, there was an audible grunt from Rachel Madow. By the sound of it, she apparently sat on her sack wrong. Happens to the best of us.

Want to slash American carbon?  Build nuclear power plants.  

You've made 8000 posts in this thread.  At one point last week you were averaging one post every 18 seconds.  Your position is well established.  Everybody including yourself knows why you chose to pr

Posted Images

15 minutes ago, HossHarris said:

I / we’ve been calling it Kung flu since it started. Keep up!

Cough/sniffle/snort/hack...

Sorry, haven't been at my best lately.

But man, you cats calling it that were fast as lightening.

In fact, it's been a little bit frightening.

 

 

 

 

I'll show myself out...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Reprehensible that DOJ/FBI fought so long and hard to hide the, apparently, exculpatory information regarding Flynn.  Including, and especially, the secret deal that DOJ and Flynn's original attornies worked out in secret, without Flynn's knowledge, because DOJ had found some legally threatening "discrepancies" in the law firm's operations.  So Flynn's original lawyers advised he fall on the grenade in order, at least partly, to protect themselves from further government investigation.  Flynn was never aware of these shenanigans.

 

 

Separate and unrelated:  And all women must be believed.  Right?  Right!?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Separate and unrelated:  And all women must be believed.  Right?  Right!?

Depends, are you a Commander who's close to promotion/retiring and afraid of the negative impact that your career will suffer if you don't? Then yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Documents released yesterday by FBI reveal the investigation of Flynn was "to get him to lie or to get him fired."  This in the notes of the then head of FBI Counterintelligence in a strategy meeting in Comey's office before the interview with agents was arranged.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brickhistory said:

Documents released yesterday by FBI reveal the investigation of Flynn was "to get him to lie or to get him fired."  This in the notes of the then head of FBI Counterintelligence in a strategy meeting in Comey's office before the interview with agents was arranged.

 

Apparently he forgot about that whole 5th Amendment thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Or, after specifically asking the Deputy Director of the FBI, "Should I have a lawyer present during the interview?" and being told no, so Flynn trusted his government.

Which is on him.

https://youtu.be/zOXtWxhlsUg

If he was read his rights, and chose to still make a statement, that's on him. If he was wasn't read his rights, then asked to make self-incriminating statements, that's a 5th and 6th Amendment violation (Miranda v. Arizona). However, SCOTUS holding in Frazier v. Cupp (1969) that law enforcement deception with regard to a target's confession is legal. Either way, regardless what anyone every tells you, no U.S. Citizen can be compelled to make a self-incriminated statement in any form. And if law enforcement, or really anyone, is questioning you about details about an alleged crime that you're the target of, they're never there for your benefit.

https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=umrsjlr

Edited by Sua Sponte
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Documents released yesterday by FBI reveal the investigation of Flynn was "to get him to lie or to get him fired."  This in the notes of the then head of FBI Counterintelligence in a strategy meeting in Comey's office before the interview with agents was arranged.

Lame stream fake media will not talk about it - given that they were part of the setup. 

But this man will go over entire thing. 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

If he was read his rights, and chose to still make a statement, that's on him. If he was wasn't read his rights, then asked to make self-incriminating statements, that's a 5th and 6th Amendment violation (Miranda v. Arizona). However, SCOTUS holding in Frazier v. Cupp (1969) that law enforcement deception with regard to a target's confession is legal. Either way, regardless what anyone every tells you, no U.S. Citizen can be compelled to make a self-incriminated statement in any form. And if law enforcement, or really anyone, is questioning you about details about an alleged crime that you're the target of, they're never there for your benefit.

https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=umrsjlr

People usually fuck themselves by not knowing that they are the target. 
 

never pass up the opportunity to shut the fuck up. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can find the video, in an interview, Comey admits to taking advantage of the confusion in the new administration to send agents over to interview Flynn without the usual requirement of going through the White House counsel.  Interesting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never never ever speak to a FBI agent without your lawyer in the room and never never ever hire a law firm where Eric Holder is a partner if you work for a Republican President. Spent 5 years in DC , I hated every second of it. Disbarments and indictments for everyone. But will not hold my breath to see perp walks of key members of the last administration.   Two tiered justice system, if you think this would never happen to you but they went after a retired 3 star General our country and Constitution is doomed.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Prosuper said:

Never never ever speak to a FBI agent without your lawyer in the room and never never ever hire a law firm where Eric Holder is a partner if you work for a Republican President. Spent 5 years in DC , I hated every second of it. Disbarments and indictments for everyone. But will not hold my breath to see perp walks of key members of the last administration.   Two tiered justice system, if you think this would never happen to you but they went after a retired 3 star General our country and Constitution is doomed.

A-fukcing-men.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boo-YA!

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation/ap-exclusive-justice-dept-dropping-flynns-criminal-case/

The Justice Department said it had concluded that Flynn’s interview by the FBI was “untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn” and that the interview on January 24, 2017 was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis.”

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2020 at 11:12 AM, Prosuper said:

Never never ever speak to a FBI agent without your lawyer in the room and never never ever hire a law firm where Eric Holder is a partner if you work for a Republican President. Spent 5 years in DC , I hated every second of it. Disbarments and indictments for everyone. But will not hold my breath to see perp walks of key members of the last administration.   Two tiered justice system, if you think this would never happen to you but they went after a retired 3 star General our country and Constitution is doomed.

Interaction with law enforcement in general. How often do we interact with law enforcement that doesn't have the potential to cost us at least a couple hundred bucks with a ticket? Honestly the only time I want to interact with law enforcement is if I'm engaging more than 1-2 active shooters. Up until that point I'm pretty good at protecting myself. Like with the AME and your medical. No one comes out having a better day than when they went in.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't seem quite right:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/13/judge-appoints-retired-judge-to-represent-flynn-prosecution-256509

Quote

A federal judge is signaling that he might pursue perjury or contempt charges against former national security adviser Michael Flynn over his effort to abandon an earlier guilty plea to a charge of lying to the FBI.

Same judge, by the way, who called Flynn, literally, a traitor in court and then had to walk that back with an apology.  Same judge who agreed with now withdrawn DOJ counsel that "all exculpatory material was out there" as he claimed last year.  Kinda disregards all the exculpatory stuff "found" in the last week.

But fair and impartial.

Go judiciary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

This doesn't seem quite right:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/13/judge-appoints-retired-judge-to-represent-flynn-prosecution-256509

Same judge, by the way, who called Flynn, literally, a traitor in court and then had to walk that back with an apology.  Same judge who agreed with now withdrawn DOJ counsel that "all exculpatory material was out there" as he claimed last year.  Kinda disregards all the exculpatory stuff "found" in the last week.

But fair and impartial.

Go judiciary.

I’m sorry, I guess I missed the part where Flynn didn’t admit to lying, then admitted again to lying during another pre-trial hearing to the judge during the plea inquiry? Even when he wanted to change his plea to not guilty he still never said he didn’t lie. What was he fired for again? Something, something, lying to Pence? You can do three things when law enforcement is “interviewing” you: tell the truth, lie, shut the fuck up. I recommend doing the latter. I don’t really want to hear about “entrapment” coming from a career military officer, who was a commander at various levels throughout his career, which meant he probably “interviewed” and gave Article 31 right advisements to people suspected of committing a crime. 

Since Barr is Trump’s personal lapdog, the dismissal isn’t surprising. It was either that a pardon. I expect to see Roger Stone’s pardon by the end of the year.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

This doesn't seem quite right:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/13/judge-appoints-retired-judge-to-represent-flynn-prosecution-256509

Same judge, by the way, who called Flynn, literally, a traitor in court and then had to walk that back with an apology.  Same judge who agreed with now withdrawn DOJ counsel that "all exculpatory material was out there" as he claimed last year.  Kinda disregards all the exculpatory stuff "found" in the last week.

But fair and impartial.

Go judiciary.

Also, the same Judge that did the following back in 2009/IAW AG Eric Holders Holders orders (long);

Executive Summary
The investigation and prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens were
permeated by the systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence
which would have independently corroborated Senator Stevens’s defense and his
testimony, and seriously damaged the testimony and credibility of the
government’s key witness. Months after the trial, when a new team of prosecutors
discovered, in short order, some of the exculpatory information that had been
withheld, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) moved to set aside the verdict and to
dismiss the indictment with prejudice. New prosecutors were assigned after U.S.
District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan held two of the previous prosecutors in contempt
for failing to comply with the Court’s order to disclose information to Senator
Stevens’s attorneys and to the Court regarding allegations of prosecutorial
misconduct which were made after trial by an FBI agent who had worked on the
case.

Judge Sullivan granted the government’s motion and dismissed the
indictment with prejudice on April 7, 2009, finding that “There was never a
judgment of conviction in this case. The jury’s verdict is being set aside and has no
legal effect.” On the same day, Judge Sullivan appointed Henry F. Schuelke III, the
undersigned, “to investigate and prosecute such criminal contempt proceedings as
may be appropriate” against the six prosecutors who conducted the investigation
and trial of Senator Stevens. The investigation lasted two years and required the
examination and analysis of well over 128,000 pages of documents, including the
trial record, prosecutors’ and agents’ emails, FBI 302s and handwritten notes, and
depositions of prosecutors, agents and others involved in the investigation and trial.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/325801/court-report-on-stevens-ethics-case.pdf

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

I’m sorry, I guess I missed the part where Flynn didn’t admit to lying, then admitted again to lying during another pre-trial hearing to the judge during the plea inquiry? Even when he wanted to change his plea to not guilty he still never said he didn’t lie. What was he fired for again? Something, something, lying to Pence? You can do three things when law enforcement is “interviewing” you: tell the truth, lie, shut the fuck up. I recommend doing the latter. I don’t really want to hear about “entrapment” coming from a career military officer, who was a commander at various levels throughout his career, which meant he probably “interviewed” and gave Article 31 right advisements to people suspected of committing a crime. 

Since Barr is Trump’s personal lapdog, the dismissal isn’t surprising. It was either that a pardon. I expect to see Roger Stone’s pardon by the end of the year.

You must have missed a lot of the parts.  There is more to the story IRT to Flynn and how things went down with the FBI.  Given the way things are playing out with this whole now confirmed fake Russia collusion story, unmaskings and 3 years of straight up lies from those in government/federal law, I can't give the feds the benefit of the doubt on this one.  My money is on the good guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lloyd christmas said:

You must have missed a lot of the parts.  There is more to the story IRT to Flynn and how things went down with the FBI.  Given the way things are playing out with this whole now confirmed fake Russia collusion story, unmaskings and 3 years of straight up lies from those in government/federal law, I can't give the feds the benefit of the doubt on this one.  My money is on the good guys.

No, I read the indictment, not Fox & Friends hot take on the “facts.” I’m the last person to have faith on the DOJ/Feds, it’s called a “court of law” not a “court of truth.” If the Feds didn’t disclose exculpatory evidence, that’s a Brady violation and it should absolutely be dismissed. But that also doesn’t negate the fact Flynn lied to Pence, which was the reason why Trump fired him. And no one can be compelled to talk to law enforcement. Apparently Flynn was too stupid to realize that. The irony in this is the same guy who started chants to “lock her up.” I guess what you view as “good” depends on where you fall on the partisan line. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...