DOJ dropping criminal case against Gen Flynn (UPDATE: DC Cir. dismisses case) (3 Viewers)

[BobE]

 

[stevo3]

Once again Taibbi with an excellent article that highlights the crumbling of the Flynn and Russia cases while also criticizing the media's role.

Was just getting ready to post a link to this. I subscribe to his site. He put's out some good stuff.

One of the few, actual liberals willing to call it like they see it rather than be a lemming with the rest of the hacks that call themselves journalists.

 

[stevo3]

I think fiction is the wrong term. It's more like fictionalized history.

You know. It's a story woven to make a dramatic point that's based on actual characters and events, but not necessarily accurate.

Sort of like The Titanic with DeCaprio and Winslett. Yes, it sank, but no, there wasn't any miraculous love story complete with recovered jewels.

What about it is fictional?

I'll admit that the true motive for why they decided to interview Flynn in order to entrap him is an educated guess. (They did write though, "What is our goal? To get him to lie? Or get him Fired?)

And the only part I was unsure of was his son. It turns out, his son was working for Flynn's private intelligence firm and the Mueller team was scrutinizing the firm over it's alleged failure to register with the gov't as a foreign agent.

So, please tell me what items outlined are not based in absolute fact. Anything I've referenced has been shown on documented evidence recently unclassified, or spoken directly by those being accused.

 

[dtc]

What about it is fictional?

I'll admit that the true motive for why they decided to interview Flynn in order to entrap him is an educated guess. (They did write though, "What is our goal? To get him to lie? Or get him Fired?)

And the only part I was unsure of was his son. It turns out, his son was working for Flynn's private intelligence firm and the Mueller team was scrutinizing the firm over it's alleged failure to register with the gov't as a foreign agent.

So, please tell me what items outlined are not based in absolute fact. Anything I've referenced has been shown on documented evidence recently unclassified, or spoken directly by those being accused.

Yeah, except you missed the point.

 

[stevo3]

Yeah, except you missed the point.

Cool.

I'll be less "dramatic"

Michael Flynn was a victim of entrapment, coercion, and political, financial, and societal ruin. Stripped of everything he worked his entire life for, including his home, all at the hands of some corrupt FBI and rogue DOJ officials.

 

[xpuma20x]

One of the few, actual liberals willing to call it like they see it rather than be a lemming with the rest of the hacks that call themselves journalists.

Serious question here: Why do people say its "calling it like they see it" when you agree with them, but they're crazy far left/right wing, when they don't agree with them?

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

What about it is fictional?

I'll admit that the true motive for why they decided to interview Flynn in order to entrap him is an educated guess. (They did write though, "What is our goal? To get him to lie? Or get him Fired?)

And the only part I was unsure of was his son. It turns out, his son was working for Flynn's private intelligence firm and the Mueller team was scrutinizing the firm over it's alleged failure to register with the gov't as a foreign agent.

So, please tell me what items outlined are not based in absolute fact. Anything I've referenced has been shown on documented evidence recently unclassified, or spoken directly by those being accused.

I wouldn’t expect a honest answer to this. The people who you might want a answer from(and no dtc I’m not being mean to you) are the same people who believe there were no scandals during the Obama administration. They are also absolutely blinded by a hatred of Trump.
What the Obama administration did to Gen. Flynn was disgusting and I would never want any republican administration to do the same to a democrat administration.

 

[stevo3]

Serious question here: Why do people say its "calling it like they see it" when you agree with them, but they're crazy far left/right wing, when they don't agree with them?

You are right. Poor choice of words.

Go against the grain. Think for himself.

Those would be more apt cliches to use there.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

You are right. Poor choice of words.

Go against the grain. Think for himself.

Those would be more apt cliches to use there.

That still begs the question as to why someone you agree with is thinking for themselves and those you disagree with are lemmings?

 

[stevo3]

That's a poor argument.

They are not lemmings because I disagree with them.

They are lemmings because none of them have any original thought.

You can go on the main page of every MSM or left leaning publication and they would all look the same. The articles would be the same. With the same buzz words and talking points. None of them willing to take a hard look at how much they've contributed to the eroision of the free press in their rush to be part of the #resistance and bring down the bad orange man once and for all.

Matt Tiabi used to run in these circles when he was writing for the Rolling Stone. But finally he took a step back, and looked the journalism landscape with a more objective and true liberal view and realized how bad things had gotten.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

That's a poor argument.

They are not lemmings because I disagree with them.

They are lemmings because none of them have any original thought.

You can go on the main page of every MSM or left leaning publication and they would all look the same. The articles would be the same. With the same buzz words and talking points. None of them willing to take a hard look at how much they've contributed to the eroision of the free press in their rush to be part of the #resistance and bring down the bad orange man once and for all.

Matt Tiabi used to run in these circles when he was writing for the Rolling Stone. But finally he took a step back, and looked the journalism landscape with a more objective and true liberal view and realized how bad things had gotten.

Do you like pizza, stevo?

 

[FullMonte]

That's a poor argument.

They are not lemmings because I disagree with them.

They are lemmings because none of them have any original thought.

You can go on the main page of every MSM or left leaning publication and they would all look the same. The articles would be the same. With the same buzz words and talking points. None of them willing to take a hard look at how much they've contributed to the eroision of the free press in their rush to be part of the #resistance and bring down the bad orange man once and for all.

I trust that you aren't implying that right leaning media sites don't do that?

 

[stevo3]

I trust that you aren't implying that right leaning media sites don't do that?

I agree. That's disturbing and should be called out wherever it is found.

But that was like what, 30 small market local news stations that reach thousands, maybe hundred's of thousands vs. National Media outlets like ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, VOX, Politico, etc... that reach millions every day.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I agree. That's disturbing and should be called out wherever it is found.

But that was like what, 30 small market local news stations that reach thousands, maybe hundred's of thousands vs. National Media outlets like ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, VOX, Politico, etc... that reach millions every day.

In terms of local news alone, Sinclair was responsible for 126 stations in 89 markets in 2018. And they have many more stations than just local affiliates that produce over 2500 hours of news content per week.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/912752/000091275219000012/sbgi-20181231x10k.htm#s7F37AD10688235D5A2CBF8FF1D5A75B2

 

[dtc]

Cool.

I'll be less "dramatic"

Michael Flynn was a victim of entrapment, coercion, and political, financial, and societal ruin. Stripped of everything he worked his entire life for, including his home, all at the hands of some corrupt FBI and rogue DOJ officials.

The problem with this is that he was guilty. Entrapment, if that's the case you want to make, is irrelevant to the consideration of whether or not he sold out his country, violated his oath and broke a number of laws.

Nobody entrapped him into acting as an unregistered foreign agent and lying to the FBI under oath is a crime whether they knew the answer in advance or not.

 

[dtc]

I wouldn’t expect a honest answer to this. The people who you might want a answer from(and no dtc I’m not being mean to you) are the same people who believe there were no scandals during the Obama administration. They are also absolutely blinded by a hatred of Trump.
What the Obama administration did to Gen. Flynn was disgusting and I would never want any republican administration to do the same to a democrat administration.

You're not being mean. You're being wrong.

Tell me if you do not see the treatment of Trump and his administration towards every single person who has ever stopped working for him or criticized him.

From judges to former cabinet members, security advisors including Flynn, and anyone who ever grabs a second of attention disagreeing with trump, this administration destroys anyone it can in furtherence of maintaining the illusion that the Orange Emperor is, in fact, clothed.

 

[Beach Friends]

The problem with this is that he was guilty. Entrapment, if that's the case you want to make, is irrelevant to the consideration of whether or not he sold out his country, violated his oath and broke a number of laws.

Nobody entrapped him into acting as an unregistered foreign agent and lying to the FBI under oath is a crime whether they knew the answer in advance or not.

When you say something like "lying to the FBI under oath is a crime," you make it clear that you don't even have a cursory understanding of the facts. Flynn wasn't "under oath" when Peter Strzok and that other scoundrel came and spoke with him.

 

[dtc]

When you say something like "lying to the FBI under oath is a crime," you make it clear that you don't even have a cursory understanding of the facts. Flynn wasn't "under oath" when Peter Strzok and that other scoundrel came and spoke with him.

Because the under oath part makes lying to the FBI not a crime, right?

Sorry.

 

[N.O.Bronco]

Seems the important facts are pretty clear, and DTC has them correct:

- Flynn knowingly lied to the FBI, even when the FBI gave him every opportunity by literally reading the transcript of his call to him and asking him if he said those words.
- Flynn knowingly failed to register as a foreign agent.
- Flynn violated the Logan Act, a law that prohibits unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. Something they knew him to be guilty of even before interviewing him.

But cheers to the president for finding a quick distraction as we barrel toward 100,000 deaths due to his incompetence. Really thought the more alarmed people on the left were going a bit too far claiming Trump would make it to WOAT status, but I got to say, he is quickly proving my reservations incorrect and making me eat my words. Buchanan might still hold the crown, but Trump certainly has him in his sights.