Bitcoin Forum

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

1. We should require internet ID for all services. If you want free speech we should at least know who you are. Barring that, at least make the ID private. Civility happens because people don't wanna be shot or beat up. If half the shit said on the web was said IRL people wouldn't like it much. It's giving power to groups to play identity politics and accumulate followers. AI driven fake news is a problem. I don't think speech should be banned and we should only see PC crap, just we should be able to ridicule the hell out of someone and be held accountable. The white identity people, the flat Earth society, conspiracy types, etc is nonsense, and we need to be able to at least vote it down to irrelevance without some special interest group with a bunch of AI doing it for us.

2. Fred Trump was in the KKK.

3. I didn't say it had to be human. I believe humans are incapable of managing themselves. The cybernetics people mid 20th century make Marx and Hayek look like school children. We never fully went head first into a cybernetic led society. The first to ever try was Chile by the socialist government and it worked so well it was destroyed when they fell. It was using 60s archaic mainframes! Lol.

https://youtu.be/wx26zpPg884

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

1. We should require internet ID for all services. If you want free speech we should at least know who you are.

Now, at the times when you can lose your job, friends, social status or even get falsely accused and get in jail for your political sights, this is one of the most retarded things that could be done.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

...

right fucking there you lazy sod. your level of shit posts revival fucking indian signature spammers.

https://www.axios.com/2018-midterm-elections-house-democrats-investigations-6bcfabb1-f1b2-49ce-8014-3e9b0c30db6c.html

^^^ Right fucking there cause I doubt you understand how to click links :)

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

....
Just goes to show you don't have any idea how the legal system here works but are ready to claim authority and knowledge of the process all day to support your opinions, because having strong opinions is all that matters right?
....

You don't get to put a timeline on it, it will take as long as it takes.  How long did Ken Starr's investigation go on?  How long do criminal investigations take?  In those 2 years several of Trumps very close contacts have been charged and or pleaded guilty to felonies involving the core of the OSC's investigation.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Problem is that he already made up his mind long ago, he considers trump guilty no matter what, look at the way he writes, things like ''well this investigation could take 4 more years, that's why he isn't convicted yet'' For me 2 years of investigation with virtually no results means most of the accusations against trump are bullshit, not saying that he is 100% not guilty but the more time passes the more innocent he looks, of course hellfish doesn't see it that way.

You know what is interesting regarding your last comment, is under the new sexual assault laws in Canada, if you were to accuse him of rape he would essentially have to prove he didn't rape you.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089923.0

I suppose this is just the general trend of thinking of these types of people, everything is relative in the pursuit of their vision of social justice, even pillars of freedom and law.

Yeah that is pretty insane, it is like that in many places even though it's not a law but essentially anyone who is accused of rape is seen as guilty instantly, which is disgusting. It also seems extremely hard to prove you didn't rape someone, specially if you actually had sex with that person and that person decides to lie about it. I blame SJW's and feminism. Also women who got caught lying about it walked almost free, almost no punishments or really mild ones compared to what the man accused of rape would have gotten.

Problem is that he already made up his mind long ago, he considers trump guilty no matter what, look at the way he writes, things like ''well this investigation could take 4 more years, that's why he isn't convicted yet'' For me 2 years of investigation with virtually no results means most of the accusations against trump are bullshit, not saying that he is 100% not guilty but the more time passes the more innocent he looks, of course hellfish doesn't see it that way.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

You know what is interesting regarding your last comment, is under the new sexual assault laws in Canada, if you were to accuse him of rape he would essentially have to prove he didn't rape you.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089923.0

That's one big hell pile of bullshit you have here xD

Sure now in Canada you have to prove that you haven't done anything when you're accused of rape.

That's exactly what the bill says. Well I could quote the part of the bill saying something even remotely close to that but i'll just... Well I could but... Well I could.

1. We should require internet ID for all services. If you want free speech we should at least know who you are. Barring that, at least make the ID private. Civility happens because people don't wanna be shot or beat up. If half the shit said on the web was said IRL people wouldn't like it much. It's giving power to groups to play identity politics and accumulate followers. AI driven fake news is a problem. I don't think speech should be banned and we should only see PC crap, just we should be able to ridicule the hell out of someone and be held accountable. The white identity people, the flat Earth society, conspiracy types, etc is nonsense, and we need to be able to at least vote it down to irrelevance without some special interest group with a bunch of AI doing it for us.

2. Fred Trump was in the KKK.

3. I didn't say it had to be human. I believe humans are incapable of managing themselves. The cybernetics people mid 20th century make Marx and Hayek look like school children. We never fully went head first into a cybernetic led society. The first to ever try was Chile by the socialist government and it worked so well it was destroyed when they fell. It was using 60s archaic mainframes! Lol.

https://youtu.be/wx26zpPg884

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Way to prove you aren't suffering from cognitive dissonance Flying Hellfish.

Have you EVER considered that if numerous people say your an asshole who can't debate with anyone as your double standards allow you to use personnal attacks, baseless statements and off topic and unrelated arguments, it might be because it's true and not because the whole world is united against you in a giant Marxist conspiracy? :)

I agree I am an asshole, often quite purposely in fact. I never said no one else should use personal attacks against me. It is however important to note my personal attacks almost always include logic based criticism along with them, unlike you fat man. Keep running.

Ahahahahah xD

Yeah of course, if you call bland statements based on absolutely nothing such as

"the 10 planks are enforced everywhere"
"Communisme can't exist without Capitalism"
"Marxists are mentally challenged"

"logic based criticism"

It's just funny how you have a definition of what logic is for you, and another one for what logic is for others.

"Marxists are mentally challenged"
Marxism necessarily requires victim status to operate, its primary form being mental illness by many other names. The thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5128946.0) which you are referring to included many sources.

"the 10 planks are enforced everywhere"
Never said that.

I think you will have to admit the world has largely adopted these policies, even if they have a different name for it.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

I'm very sorry, it seems you confuse sources and a dictionnary. That's sad.

Your sources are just defining the mental illness. You're the one claiming that marxists suffer them. You understand the difference?

But again here you claim that Marxism requires "victim status to operate" and that without anything else that your opinion.

I don't think I've seen you state anything factual here. You bring your opinion, then you yell loudly at anyone criticizing it. That's your way of doing things.



Memory problem my dear?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5125094.0

That's the reason why people no longer want you in discussions. Not because you have a truth that they don't want to here. But because you're a lying asshole just vomitting his opinion.

People like you don't want me in their discussions because I don't let you get away with your easy mindless platitudes and challenge you to provide actual empirical data or logic to support your assertions, which of course you are nearly incapable of.

Marxism is based upon victim status. The proletariat and the oppressed masses which need to create a revolution to overthrow the bourgeoisie yadda yadda.

You know, since I've came to realization that you're just dumb I'm really having fun discussing with you  ;D



I don't even have to really talk to you, just putting your own words close together make it funny ^^

Dumb people often think they are smarter than they are, but your logical arguments are so water tight, clearly that is me right? P.S. you aren't having a discussion, you are talking at me not with me.

Marxism is based upon victim status. The proletariat and the oppressed masses which need to create a revolution to overthrow the bourgeoisie yadda yadda. It is a collectivized (http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Collective_narcissism) form of malignant narcissism (http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Malignant_narcissism). It is a simple formula. Either find or create victims, point at a target group and condition them to believe that target group is responsible for their victim status, justify victimizing them in the name of equality, create more victims as a result, rinse and repeat.

I don't even have to really talk to you, just putting your own words close together make it funny ^^

One thing to add.
It is true that Marxism always operates to victim status of some class. But as we see it is not necessarily supposed to be the proletariat. Working class was in the middle of marxist ideology somewhere at the 20 century. Now when proletariat understood that Marx was wrong and working class does not really suffer from anything Marxists switched their ideology to different minorities: mostly sexual or religious ones.

In some other words: "I know that I'm right but I don't know how to prove it and I don't have to because you are wrong."

So, posts are being vanished again. Well, that should be expected. The tool of censorship is a primary tool of the totalitarian Leftists.

A prized tool, indeed, often the only tool.

So, posts are being vanished again. Well, that should be expected. The tool of censorship is a primary tool of the totalitarian Leftists.

A prized tool, indeed, often the only tool.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, if you mean the post tecshare made in my self mod'd thread yes I am censoring it as I see fit.  If you're patient as soon as he notices I deleted his post in my thread he will re-post it here. He's done it already quite a few times.  One would think he could take a hint and not post in my thread anymore but it is what it is.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

So, posts are being vanished again. Well, that should be expected. The tool of censorship is a primary tool of the totalitarian Leftists.

A prized tool, indeed, often the only tool.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

The only people who are unwilling to have an open debate are those selling lies.

Nope.

There are also the people tired of your double standards, your stupidity and your bad faith :)

No one forces you to interact with me fat man. You seek it out, you challenge me in a debate, you fail miserably, then you cry that I am being stupid and have double standards, and repeat. If you don't like criticism don't post to a public forum designed to host open discussion.

That's exactly what FH is doing and what you're crying about beautiful and muscular thin man ^^

He's posting in a self mod thread so he can get rid of you.

But you are only capable of having this conversation/argument/rant because you (and Flying Hellfish) are responding to other posts in the OPEN FORUM THREAD. The thread in which posts vanish is dead.

The joke is on you.

Yeah because this conversation is sooooooooo interesting that it would be a shame to censor that xD

Anyone not reading our endless ping-pong chat with TECSHARE is clearly missing out something important.  ;D

I'm answering TECSHARE. It's not something I deem worthy of being read by anyone more than him.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Yeah because this conversation is sooooooooo interesting that it would be a shame to censor that xD

Anyone not reading our endless ping-pong chat with TECSHARE is clearly missing out something important.  ;D

I'm answering TECSHARE. It's not something I deem worthy of being read by anyone more than him.

Just saying that when the "objectionable post" is vanished, that conversation cannot occur. You don't have the opportunity to explain to everyone how stupid he is/

True but as that someone doesn't know how to read his own language it might be even better :)

Except it would be less funny of course.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

It is interesting that a forum moderator is engaging in censorship via a self moderated thread, and is trolling (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123357.msg50691503#msg50691503) in others.

This is particularly concerning given how much the forum values free speech. None of the posts in this thread are off topic, and all are attempting to add to the discussion.

I guess this fits the left's belief that free speech is bad, and that ideas should not be debated, but rather that opposing ideas should be shouted down. Sad

This demonstrates clearly Flying Hellfish either judges people or judges them based on his opinions of their opinions, but most certainly does not judge people based on the merit of their words.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Problem is that he already made up his mind long ago, he considers trump guilty no matter what, look at the way he writes, things like ''well this investigation could take 4 more years, that's why he isn't convicted yet'' For me 2 years of investigation with virtually no results means most of the accusations against trump are bullshit, not saying that he is 100% not guilty but the more time passes the more innocent he looks, of course hellfish doesn't see it that way.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

This demonstrates clearly Flying Hellfish either judges people or judges them based on his opinions of their opinions, but most certainly does not judge people based on the merit of their words.

No, this demonstrates that FH doesn't like you and Spendulus. It can be because of your opinion. But it can be because you're both stupid assholes who love to say shit without proving anything, and once you've soaked the room with your own shit you like to yell "PROVE YOUR POINT" while dancing in your own shit xD

No, this demonstrates that FH doesn't like you and Spendulus. It can be because of your opinion. But it can be because you're both stupid assholes who love to say shit without proving anything, and once you've soaked the room with your own shit you like to yell "PROVE YOUR POINT" while dancing in your own shit xD

Is that why he removed several posts which were literally nothing more than links and titles from reputable news outlets?

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/448589-arent-delirious-democrats-now-accusing-team-obama-of-treason

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Judicial Watch: New Docs Show FBI Agents Went To Comey’s Home to Retrieve Memos

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-docs-show-fbi-agents-went-to-comeys-home-to-retrieve-memos/

"Justice department opens criminal inquiry into origins of Russia investigation"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/24/justice-department-opens-criminal-inquiry-into-origins-of-russia-investigation-source

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/mike-flynn-withdraws-guilty-plea-due-governments-bad-faith-vindictiveness-and-breach-plea

Where have all the "Trump investigations" gone?

It would be a shame for the "Pussygate thread" to die.

The original thread was already "mysteriously" deleted by a mod.

The original thread was already "mysteriously" deleted by a mod.

"Ukraine Launches Criminal Probe Into 'Illegal Surveillance' Of American Ambassador Fired By Trump"

"Keep in mind: many of the handwritten notes released yesterday were unverified and undated, though Dems allege they were written by Parnas."

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/ukraine-launches-criminal-probe-illegal-surveillance-american-ambassador-fired-trump

Wait, I'm confused now.

Is Pussygate a collection of investigations into Trump, or by Trump et al?

Because if it's the latter, there's a lot of material to cover.

It has been "Trump et al" from day 1.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/adam-schiff-exhibit

While Joe and Hunter Biden have been absurdly off limits in the impeachment of President Trump, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is quickly becoming the GOP's "Exhibit A" over claims of an unfair trial in the House, as well as his involvement - and alleged coordination - with the anti-Trump CIA 'whistleblower' who kicked off the entire proceeding.

Schiff, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has repeatedly come under fire for conducting 'secret basement' hearings, while refusing to call key witnesses such as the Bidens, their business associates, or Ukrainian authorities with intimate knowledge of corruption claims.

This anonymouse zerohedge blogger thinks (or wants you to think (or doesn't really care, in it for the clicks and knows how to fire you up)) that the trial was in the House and that it's Schiffs fault if the Bidens aren't subpoenaed in the actual trial, which is in the Senate, which is controlled by Republicans.

The 'Ukrainian authorities' that are considered key witnesses that should be called to testify is also hilarious.  Has anyone in congress actually suggested that?

This anonymouse zerohedge blogger thinks (or wants you to think (or doesn't really care, in it for the clicks and knows how to fire you up)) that the trial was in the House and that it's Schiffs fault if the Bidens aren't subpoenaed in the actual trial, which is in the Senate, which is controlled by Republicans.

The 'Ukrainian authorities' that are considered key witnesses that should be called to testify is also hilarious.  Has anyone in congress actually suggested that?

You don't care about facts, due process, trials, or anything.

Yeah I really do.

The trial is in the Senate, not the House.
It takes a simple majority vote (51) to subpoena a witness for the trial.  There are 53 republicans in the Senate, so they decide who/what to subpoena or not subpoena anything at all.

I don't think they would subpoena leaders of another country since they can't really hold them accountable if they lie, but not sure.  Do you really think they are considering subpoenaing Ukraine officials?  The corrupt prosecutor that got fired because of Obama who only prosecuted people who supported Ukraines independence from Russia wouldn't be very credible, if that's who they're thinking about.  He's shown more loyalty to Russia than Ukraine, which is why Obama, the EU and IMA wanted him gone.

No, really you don't. You just pay these ideals lip service.

Your assumption that I don't care about anything is false.

Why would I even be here posting about Trump investigations if I didn't care?  And that's just one thing.  I care about lots of other things also, including facts, which is why I pointed out that the blog you posted had a bunch of false statements.  Don't take it personal.

Your assumption that I am "taking it personal" is false.

Horowitz concluded the FBI was legally justified in launching its inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. There was no "documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI’s decision to conduct these operations," the report said.

The 400-page report debunks claims by the president and his allies that political bias played a role in the FBI's decision to investigate members of the Trump campaign for possible coordination with Russia. The inspector general also said there was "no evidence" the FBI placed any undercover sources or agents in the Trump campaign or had them attend campaign events.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6571579-FISA-120919-Examination.html

8)

"The FISA court's top judge wrote in a secret ruling on January 7 that at least two of the four spy warrants against Carter Page were invalid and not lawfully authorized."

Horowitz concluded the FBI was legally justified in launching its inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. There was no "documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI’s decision to conduct these operations," the report said.

The 400-page report debunks claims by the president and his allies that political bias played a role in the FBI's decision to investigate members of the Trump campaign for possible coordination with Russia. The inspector general also said there was "no evidence" the FBI placed any undercover sources or agents in the Trump campaign or had them attend campaign events.

That's basically what the IG report said also.  The FISA process was fucked up. Also there was an agent who falsified some records.

imo Page's rights were violated and something should be done to prevent that from happening again and hopefully page will get some sort of compensation or something.

The IG was taking all of this into account when he issued the report and the recent ruling only addresses one aspect of the investigation, the FISA warrants that the original report already called out.

I was just pointing this out to anyone that may have a tendency to speculate and make assumptions based on headlines alone.

...

Not speculation. Facts. Also the fact is the entire investigation into Trump hinged on those Carter Page warrants, meaning this whole fucking process was illegal.

I suspect the best is yet to come.

Oh, I suspect the vast majority of people have no idea of the scope of what is about to happen.

"Dershowitz Says Obama "Personally Asked" FBI To Investigate Someone For George Soros"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/dershowitz-says-obama-personally-asked-fbi-investigate-someone-george-soros

I'd like to see George Soros investigated.

I get the impression that is already happening.

REPORT
OF THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
UNITED STATES SENATE
ON
RUSSIAN ACTIVE MEASURES CAMPAIGNS AND INTERFERENCE
IN THE 2016 U.S. ELECTION
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

---

Republican-Led Review Backs Intelligence Findings on Russian Interference

"A new Senate report undercuts claims by President Trump and his allies that Obama-era officials sought to undermine him while investigating Russia’s 2016 election meddling."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/us/politics/russian-interference-senate-intelligence-report.html

2017..."new" It is also a report from the very people responsible for the crimes. Very reliable.

My bad, I only linked the original report. (I edited it)

The Senate intelligence committee (Republican Run) just finished their review of the 2017 intelligence report and turns out it was all good.

"Unsealed FBI Handwritten Notes, Emails Reveal Agents Plotted Perjury Trap On Flynn"

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-unsealed-fbi-handwritten-notes-emails-reveal-agents-plotted-perjury-trap-flynn

"Surprise discovery in Flynn case: former lawyers find evidence they failed to produce"

https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-dod-baker-ignatius-prod-1-03564/



"Judicial Watch: Emails Show Extensive Communications Between Senior Defense Official and Columnist Who Published Leaked Info on Flynn Calls with Russian Ambassador"

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/flynn-dodofficial-columnist/

The Flynn thing is interesting.

If you purger yourself during a guilty plea, and the guilty plea is part of a plea deal to avoid much more serious crimes, and then you get everything thrown out....he's going to face charges for the crimes he actually committed right?  And not get any credit for all the cooperation.

I mean, we know Turkey was paying him when he wrote that op-ed.  And we know he lied on his financial disclosures.  And we know he didn't register as foreign agent till he got caught...and that's one item on a list of many things...

What is his play here?  Are people really going to rally around him and claim exoneration because he wasn't told not to lie to the FBI?

“What is our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” the notes read.

Was reading some broadstrokes of the politico article regarding all of this, and it all looks a bit weird. Here's one of the quotes that I grabbed that was a bit weird from one of the FBI officials:


That just sounds a bit weird. I know that it is a common goal of investigators to ask you questions that they already know the answer to, it just comes off a bit weird to me. I think that Flynn is praying that the new Justice Department under the lead of William Barr will be a bit friendly towards him.

I know Barr has a taskforce setup to investigate the investigation of Barr to see if there was any wrongdoing, still ongoing.

Check out his guilty plea: https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

I take back the perjury statement earlier...it doesn't seem like he's actually claiming innocent (I could be wrong).

I don't get how there is such a huge rally around the guy.  I mean, I get he was a huge asset to the military...but he obviously broke the law, admitted it and took a deal that very likely would result in no jail time.

Am I missing something Tecshare?  Do you think he's actually innocent?  Or just not care that he's guilty since you share political views?

Thought for a second that you were calling me TecShare and got a bit confused.

I think the end goal for this guy is to be able to get out of this and to say that the FBI was against him the whole time in a biased way, and that he was never wrong at all. Maybe he'll try to clear his name to be able to start up another consulting company (and this time follow the law)

No idea. No idea what the hell is going on here. Give it a few days and the news will tell us some story.....lol.

Na, but Tecshare seems to be buying into the whole 'gotcha' mentality that most of the right wing media is pushing right now.

I mean yeah, FBI fucked up.  And yeah maybe Flynn will get off bc of it.  But treating the guy like a victim because 'they didn't tell me it would be illegal to lie to the fbi about crimes I committed'...really?

CONSPIRACY SITES! CONSPIRACY SITES! RIGHT WING MEDIA! SWAAAAWK!

It is pretty pathetic how much you rely on character attacks. If the FBI interviews me and I tell them I ate a ham sandwich at 12:15, and it was really at 12:18, I can be charged with perjury against the FBI. If I tell them I put mustard on it and it was really mayo, that is another perjury charge. This is a well known strategy the FBI uses to railroad people when they have no evidence to support other charges. This was a political prosecution for a process crime. Of course people like you prefer to reject reality and substitute your own as long as it confirms your bias. It amazes me with such tiny nuts how you still have the balls to still try to support this Russia collusion delusion after everything that has come out.

Do you think Flynn did these things: https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

Do you think Flynn did these things: https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

Funny, with how much weight they are putting on what Flynn said, there is no actual transcript of what he actually said included. Interesting huh?

Now you show in the document you presented, where are the CRIMES THAT HE COMMITTED that he lied about?

Or was the crime the crime of lying? Big difference here.

Funny, with how much weight they are putting on what Flynn said, there is no actual transcript of what he actually said included. Interesting huh?

He was being paid by Turkey to lobby the US gov on their behalf.  He didn't file as a foreign agent within 10 days (felony), and when he did file 4 months later after he got caught, he lied on the Foreign Agent application and didn't include things that were required by law to include (felony).

Let's see the court transcript and the supporting evidence, including full transcripts of the source documents.

There is a HUGE amount of very suspicious behavior in this case, and I will give you a hint. It's not on Flynn's side.

:P
I don't think you understand.  He pled guilty.  There was no trial.  The only court transcripts would be of him pleading guilty, and (almost) getting sentenced where the judge basically asked him a bunch of times "are you sure? do you understand what's happening? do you understand there's no take backs?"

I don't think you understand. This is what's called plea bargaining. There certainly is evidence and there are transcripts. Those would have been presented early in the process.

 In the American legal system plea bargaining is much abused. Routinely, innocent people are put in jail for 3-5 years, being pressured to not go to trial as the DA says he will then seek the maximum term.

Plea bargaining guilty is not actually guilty, so please do not act like it is. This case is not over, and my prediction is Flynn will be free, as he should be. I suggest you move on to stronger issues, but if you want to defend the government's handling of this matter, go to it.

I'm not defending the government.  All I'm saying is that with all the focus on Russia, impeachment and the FBI acting shady people are just assuming Flynn is innocent.  He's not.  

Michael Flynn is a convicted felon, but if people that reach a deal and plead guilty is not actually guilty let's just talk basic ethics here.

He wrote this op-ed on 2016 election day: Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support (https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support)
At the time Flynn was widely respected as a retired 3 Star General and part of the Trump Campaign.

Here's his Foreign Agent Registration Filing: https://efile.fara.gov/docs/6406-Supplemental-Statement-20170307-1.pdf
Notice how it was filed in March 2017?

https://i.gyazo.com/1dc7b5e271a9018749816e0ab0d80d1d.png

Do you believe that Flynn was being paid by Turkey in 2016 while he was lobbying American politicians to support Turkey in 2016?

Do you believe he did not register as a foreign agent until March 2017?

Do you think it's ethical to lobby for another country that's paying you without being transparent about the fact you're getting paid?  (On bitcointalk we call that shilling.)

Do you believe it would be wrong to make false statements when filing for FARA?  If so, I'll explain the false statements he made if you need.

HUR DUR I'mma pretend like I don't know what plea bargaining is

The federal conviction rate is 98%. If you are being charged you WILL be convicted, right or wrong. These charges are manufactured process crimes, and more evidence of this fact is exposed every day in spite of your willful ignorance of this fact. Of course you cling to this totally dismissed desperate effort to push this failed narrative because the democrat party can not win by any legitimate means. As expected, it never stops, accusation after accusation, each one getting more strained and senseless than the last, as they are all proven to be pathetic political ploys one by one. Your party's desperation to save its own ass from prosecution will be the fibers wound into the rope used hang them with.

Do you think Flynn violated the Foreign Agent Registration Act?

....
....

Do you believe that Flynn was being paid by Turkey in 2016 while he was lobbying American politicians to support Turkey in 2016?

Do you believe he did not register as a foreign agent until March 2017?

Do you think it's ethical to lobby for another country that's paying you without being transparent about the fact you're getting paid?  (On bitcointalk we call that shilling.)

Do you believe it would be wrong to make false statements when filing for FARA?  If so, I'll explain the false statements he made if you need.

So you have some things that you think are illegal, that make Flynn a BAD GUY, and these are different than what he was convicted of? He was convicted of "lying to the FBI." After plea bargaining guilty.

WTF?

He accepted the plea deal so that he wouldn't be charged with all the crimes he committed.

But that's the very nature of plea bargaining, to agree to lesser or fewer charges and move the case rapidly through the court system.

We all already knew that. I think, or I hope we all did. So now we really need to focus on the entrapment and the charge of "lying to the FBI." Because that's what real. If you want to call him a "convicted felon", then that's what you got. No more, no less.

...

We all already knew that. I think, or I hope we all did. So now we really need to focus on the entrapment and the charge of "lying to the FBI." Because that's what real. If you want to call him a "convicted felon", then that's what you got. No more, no less.

If he finds away to reverse his guilty plea, do you think he should be off the hook for all the charges he avoided by taking the deal?  There seems to be enough evidence to go to trial.

But he's already admitted he's guilty of several crimes he wasn't charged with.  

And even if he didn't, the 4 month late FARA filing was essentially admitting he didn't file within the 10 days required.  And it's easy to prove the FARA filing contained false statements.

The whole thing is just weird.  He wasn't charged with any of the serious crimes he admitted to, and he most likely wasn't going to get any time. He plead guilty bc he got a good deal.

It would be like if a cop pulled someone over for a DUI, the guy failed the breathalyzer, but decided to just give him a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt.  The guy says thank you, pays the fine and then goes to court to try and get the whole thing thrown out bc the cop was lying about his seatbelt.

This is the VERY DEFINITION of plea bargaining. If it's weird, it's weird hundreds of thousands of times per year. Virtually all prisons in the US are full then of people, usually of color, who have gone through this "weird" judicial process called plea bargaining.

Are you starting to "get it?"

Oh, and by the way, the cop that gave him a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt when he failed the breathalyzer? That cop should be fired, and the guy should have the case thrown out.

....I feel like you're just looking for any possible way to rationalize to yourself that Flynn is a victim here.  He's not a poor minority with a shit public defender.  He's a retired 3 star general that's buddys with the president and he got a great deal considering he betrayed the country.  

I'm thinking he must be confident that they won't be able to charge him for any of the crimes we know he did.  I'm not sure how though.  It just wouldn't make sense for him to do what he's doing if he thought it were possible he'd be charged again.  The evidence is overwhelming even without the signed admission.  His only option would be to....plea to a lesser charge lol.

Explaining to you the reality of plea bargaining is not rationalizing anything to myself.

You seem intent on getting people interested in what he WASN'T CHARGED WITH, which puzzles me.

There were some very, very wrong things going on on the Gov side in the items he was charged with, and if justice is to be served, those need to be corrected. Pretty much everyone acknowledges Flynn is a victim here, of improper actions by FBI administrators who have been fired for those exact actions. duh...

How much can you be blind to ?

...
Imagine if Hunter Biden ....

No, not interested in playing that game.

Are you through now bitching about things OTHER THAN what Flynn was charged and convicted of, with gross prosecutorial side malfeasance?

Do you put any effort into being objective?

I mean, you can't really think it's not a big deal for someone powerful to act as a foreign agent without disclosing it...and lie about it when you get caught....can you?

Do you think this should be ok?

I think you know it's really fucked up but you just can't bring yourself to say something bad about the guy.

Why would Flynn plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit?


"Attorney: Michael Flynn's plea was coerced by a threat to indict his son"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/attorney-michael-flynns-plea-was-coerced-by-a-threat-to-indict-his-son/vp-BB13i3oO

(this is against official policy BTW)



A lawyer describes how he was railroaded in detail:

"General Flynn Versus the FBI! Lawyer Robert Barnes and Stefan Molyneux"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoXCB1lx6aA

Why would Flynn plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit?

To avoid being charged for the more serious crimes he did commit.

To avoid being charged for the more serious crimes he did commit.

Present the evidence to back this assertion.

lawful behavior of investigators in collecting evidence

Care to show me what they did was illegal? Last time I looked at it, it wasn't. That's the fault of the crap laws involved and not the actions of the FBI. You can argue about the morality about it all you want, but as far as I know, it wasn't illegal. Granted I looked at it a few months ago so maybe something new has come to light.

I already did.  You think that a retired 3 star general lobbying America policy makers to support another country without disclosing the fact that he was paid $500k by foreign interest is 'a manufactured process crime'.

Spendulus took a different route and pivoted to "he wasn't charged with the crime so I don't care stop talking about it" attitude.

I could also prove that when he eventually did file as a foreign agent, he made materially false statements and omitted information he was required to provide, but honestly I don't think there's literally anything that would convince either of you that Flynn committed serious crimes.  Trump said he's innocent - in your minds that trumps any actual facts.  Plus you could always just google a bunch of articles defending Flynn.

No, you really have not shown that he was guilty. I understand that you think you have, but you have not. You'd have to do quite a bit of research, and prepare a properly argued brief, to get half way where you think you already are. You'd have to cover the common arguments by defense in said brief. And defeat those arguments.

There are many technical details in such a matter, and there are numerous standards to be met before a DA would take a case and bring it to court. He'd have to be pretty certain that he was going to win, right?

...
What have I not proven.  If we can agree that the above is true I'll move on to the false statements and omissions he made on is FARA filing.
...

I have to hand it to you. You've just proved that the BBC, XINHUA, CARE, AIPAC, RT, Al Jazeerra, and Fox News, and about ten thousand Chinese agents in universities need to register as a foreign agents. Including a couple Chinese agents who wrote Badecker's prize find report "Fire did not down World Trade Center Building 7".

Not to mention John Podesta, Diane Feldstein's chauffeur, Hillary's bosom buddy Huma Aberdin, Valarie Jerret, and Debbie Wasserman's IT dickhead.

In late 2016 he:
1) Registered as a lobbiest.
2) Did not register as a foreign agent.
3) Lobbied to support Turkey.
4) Was paid $500k by a Turkish company.

In March 2017 he:
5) Registered retroactively as a foreign agent because of his actions in late 2016.


Let's try to look at the whole thing objectively and put political views aside.

Do you believe that these 5 things are true?

I already did.  You think that a retired 3 star general lobbying America policy makers to support another country without disclosing the fact that he was paid $500k by foreign interest is 'a manufactured process crime'.

Spendulus took a different route and pivoted to "he wasn't charged with the crime so I don't care stop talking about it" attitude.

I could also prove that when he eventually did file as a foreign agent, he made materially false statements and omitted information he was required to provide, but honestly I don't think there's literally anything that would convince either of you that Flynn committed serious crimes.  Trump said he's innocent - in your minds that trumps any actual facts.  Plus you could always just google a bunch of articles defending Flynn.

...
This was never about Flynn. This was just one of several people railroaded under color of law in order to try to force Trump out of office by coercing them into giving false testimony against Trump.

It's not impossible that some lower level FBI employees involved in the work were not told of the actual scheme, and actually thought it was an investigation into Russian Collusion.

Maybe a secretary, or a janitor?

I don't have any idea if they are true. Therefore, I do not "believe they are true."

We write on behalf of our clients Flynn Intel Group and its Chairman and CEO, General Michael T. Ftynn

Ok.  I'll give you some information so you have an idea.

Let's start with #1, and I'll be more specific - there are 2 parts really:

A) Flynn was the chairman and CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC.

B) FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. disclosed under the Lobbying Disclosure Act that they were going to lobby the federal government in early 2016.

---

A)

Here's a letter submitted to the senate by Flynns lawyer.  We'll get to the actual contents of the letter later, for now just notice the first sentence:
https://efile.fara.gov/docs/6406-Registration-Statement-20170307-1.pdf


Also notice that Michael Flynns last name is used in FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC

B)

Here's a lobby disclosure act filing, made by FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC  9/15/2016:
https://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?event=getFilingDetails&filingID=38f812b5-2692-449a-9f02-15ed82f4ec24&filingTypeID=1

---

So, do have an idea now as to whether or not Flynn was involved with lobbying the federal government in late 2016?

The main complaint seems to be that they didn't tell him that it's illegal to lie to the fbi.

The agents notes were released, they discussed not telling him at first because they wanted him to be relaxed when they asked him questions that they already knew the answers to and would force him to either lie, confess or refuse to answer.

....
So, do have an idea now as to whether or not Flynn was involved with lobbying the federal government in late 2016?

It would appear that you have not been truthful about the consequences of late filing under the FARA Act.  The actual fact here is you've read some propaganda and believed it. Flynn's "filing late" was not "a more serious charge." It was a trivial case.Now you have to consider the actual legal MEANING of the "failure to file" being "willful" or not. Here are the actual facts...DIRECT FROM THE FARA WEBSITE

It certainly looks like he was late in getting some of that darn government paperwork in.

So what?

Here is the FARA policy.




WHAT SHOULD I DO IF MY REGISTRATION IS LATE?

Agents who do not file a registration when the obligation arises should register as soon as possible and contact the FARA Unit indicating the reason for the delinquency.

ARE THERE CONSEQUENCES FOR LATE FILINGS?

Yes.  Late filings may be considered a deficiency in registration, in which case a party could be prohibited from acting as an agent of a foreign principal pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 618(g).  The Department of Justice could also seek an injunction to order compliance with FARA pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 618(f), or pursue criminal charges pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 618(a), if the failure to file is willful.

https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/frequently-asked-questions#23

....
When we get to what he actually put on the FARA filing things will become more clear.  

Do you have enough information to accept that

A) Flynn was the chairman and CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC.

B) FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. disclosed under the Lobbying Disclosure Act that they were going to lobby the federal government in early 2016.

No, things will not "become more clear" because they are confused in your mind only.

Next, let's look at what happens if a FARA filing is inaccurate or wrong, or if conditions change for the entity utilizing FARA.

HOW OFTEN MUST A REGISTRANT SUPPLEMENT OR UPDATE ITS INITIAL REGISTRATION?

Registrants must file supplemental statements at six-month intervals following the date of the registrant’s initial registration.  The supplemental statement, and its corresponding filing fee of $305.00 for each foreign principal, is due 30 days after the six-month reporting end date.  See 22 U.S.C. § 612(b); 28 C.F.R. § 5.203.

https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/frequently-asked-questions#27

What happens? You update the information every six months or as requested.

PS: You said "FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. disclosed under the Lobbying Disclosure Act that they were going to lobby the federal government in early 2016." and seem to think this is somehow evidence for a need to file under FARA.

Filing under the LDA is black and white letter law one of the allowed EXEMPTIONS TO FARA. However, there are numerous vague details and uncertainties in how to interpret such a thing. It may be that Flynn later filed under FARA in order to "cover all the bases."

https://www.cov.com/-/media/files/corporate/publications/2018/01/the_foreign_agents_registration_act_fara_a_guide_for_the_perplexed.pdf

I'm just trying to go step by step to see what we can agree on.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support (https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support)
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

I'm not implying anything here, this isn't an attempted 'gotcha', I'm just trying to agree on facts.  Do you agree with me that the above facts are true?  If not, which one(s)?

I'm just trying to go step by step to see what we can agree on.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support (https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support)
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

I'm not implying anything here, this isn't an attempted 'gotcha'. I'm just trying to agree on facts.  Do you agree with me that the above 3 statements are true?  If not, which one(s)?

So far you've been wrong about the "serious crime" of not filing FARA, wrong about the relationship between LDA and FARA, wrong about the seriousness or lack of in updating FARA documents...

Where are you getting this garbage, if you don't mind me asking? some shit site like Media Matters?

How about we just go through and see what we can agree on?  It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support (https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support)
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true?  This isn't a trick question.

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on?  It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support (https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support)
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true?  This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm sure the lying cunts of FBI agents who interviewed Flynn also told him they didn't have any "Trick Questions."

Right?

Na.  When it comes to Flynns case I think it's possible the FBI did something shady, but I have yet to see any proof.

I'm pretty sure that the FBI agents contemplated what the goal of the interview was “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” which makes it pretty clear they knew Flynn was guilty when they interviewed him.  

I'm also sure that Trump fired Flynn and said the reason was because Flynn lied to the Vice President.

I'm also sure that Flynn plead guilty (twice) to lying to the FBI and admitted to several other crimes in the process.

I'm also sure that there's tons of other evidence the proves Flynn is indeed a criminal.

I'm also sure that Flynn is a convicted felon.

Na.  When it comes to Flynns case I think it's possible the FBI did something shady, but I have yet to see any proof.

I'm pretty sure that the FBI agents contemplated what the goal of the interview was “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” which makes it pretty clear they knew Flynn was guilty when they interviewed him.  

I'm also sure that Trump fired Flynn and said the reason was because Flynn lied to the Vice President.

I'm also sure that Flynn plead guilty (twice) to lying to the FBI and admitted to several other crimes in the process.

I'm also sure that there's tons of other evidence the proves Flynn is indeed a criminal.

I'm also sure that Flynn is a convicted felon.

In and of itself that's all fine. But the need to repeat these beliefs mantra-style before you have your Cheerios each morning is definite evidence of TDS. We can help you with that. Start by repeating to yourself silently (so that nobody can hear you) "Orange Man Good".

NO U!

....
Let's recap.

First you asked me to explain to you the Flynns crimes that didn't involve lying to the FBI.
So I did.

Then you said you needed to see more documents.
So I provided and explained them.

Then you said you had no idea about any of it.
So I broke it down into tiny bite sized chunks to make it easy to understand.

Then you said you really don't care about if the facts are true.
And now you troll.

I know you aren't a retard so it must be willful ignorance.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm really surprised after all this time that you think he's being honest or can have a rational debate with anyone on this sort of subject. He's just better at appearing more "rational" then techshare. In case you haven't noticed, he will completely avoid admitting or agreeing to anything at all that might mean his point of view could be called into question or that he could be even remotely wrong. His "this isn't of interest to me" statement isn't being truthful. ...

He was being paid by Turkey to lobby the US gov on their behalf.  He didn't file as a foreign agent within 10 days (felony), and when he did file 4 months later after he got caught, he lied on the Foreign Agent application and didn't include things that were required by law to include (felony).


Yeah, maybe his lawyer is part of the deep state and they kidnapped his kids or something to force him to sign the statement of offence and plea deal.

https://i.gyazo.com/c992defd1ab5de950e4b4e28ce782c10.png

Ms. Powell [his current lawyer] also accused his former team of providing Mr. Flynn with bad advice, and alleged government investigators had improperly pursued Mr. Flynn.

I'm really surprised after all this time that you think he's being honest or can have a rational debate with anyone on this sort of subject. He's just better at appearing more "rational" then techshare. In case you haven't noticed, he will completely avoid admitting or agreeing to anything at all that might mean his point of view could be called into question or that he could be even remotely wrong. His "this isn't of interest to me" statement isn't being truthful. It's just another means of avoiding having to agree with you about anything or even remotely admit that something could be true that would in some way weaken his point of view. You're completely wasting your time attempting to have any sort of real debate with him. But maybe you just do it for entertainment purposes in which case carry on man.

Just to comment on the lawyer part, I'm pretty sure that there he was able to leave the plea deal due to him saying he got bad guidance from a lawyer -- or something along those lines. Yeah, here's the article from the WSJ

We had a similar discussion about global warming (he thinks global cooling is more of a threat).  I think the way he responds is interesting.  He went from  I don't understand => I need more evidence => I still don't know anything => I don't care/troll. Is he just arguing in bad faith, or is he genuinely convinced that his thought process is rational?  We'll never know.


I don't think he's actually been able to retract his guilty plea. If he does though, I think it will be due to the DOJ prosecutors failing to produce the investigator notes (brady act) rather than anything the FBI or his lawyer did.  

It's a pretty interesting situation if he does though.  Will all charges be back on the table?  If so, it seems like he'd just end up in the same spot he was in before accepting the deal, except he won't have cooperating with Mueller as a bargaining chip and he's already admitted guilt to the whole Turkey

His new lawyer, Sidney Powell is quite the character though.  Sells some funny t-shirts on her site https://sidneypowell.com/shop/apparel/creepsonamission-shirt/

https://i.gyazo.com/68aec3c26da1977b67abee8e1faec15d.png

....
I assume that there's some legal precedent where if someone pulls back their plea, due to them not having correct advice from their legal counsel (or the best advice, that is), then investigators aren't allowed to use that information against them. I'm not a lawyer, and I assume most that are sitting on this forum aren't as well, but I can't see the point in retracting the plea and your negotiating tactic without this being the case.

Republicans on the judiciary committe have already expressed the fact that they want testimony to begin regarding this case. (Not surprising, but still)

Plea was not made voluntarily, or was entered without knowledge of the charge or sentence.

do you ever read things that might disprove what u thinks is true?


THE COURT: Do you wish to challenge the circumstances on
which you were interviewed by the FBI?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you understand that by maintaining your
guilty plea and continuing with sentencing, you will give up your
right forever to challenge the circumstances under which you were
interviewed?
FLYNN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have any concerns that you entered your
guilty plea before you or your attorneys were able to review
information that could have been helpful to your defense?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: At the time of your January 24th, 2017
interview with the FBI, were you not aware that lying to FBI
investigators was a federal crime?
FLYNN: I was aware.
THE COURT: You were aware?
FLYNN: Yeah.

Sure. What part of the two elements I bolded have anything to do with your list?

How about you?Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not?

Does that sound like it's okay in your internal system of judgement? It doesn't bother Twitch, that's certain.

how do u know they threatened to charge is son?

maybe he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate only if they didnt charge him.

You don't seem to have any problem making assumptions when it comes to Flynn being a victim, but when presented when facts and evidence of him being guilty...totally different story.

Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not?

We don't know what really happened.

But, have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate and plead guilty to lesser charges only if they didnt charge his son?

We don't know what really happened.

But, have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate and plead guilty to lesser charges only if they didnt charge his son?

Once again, the federal conviction rate is 98%.

As of 2018 (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/ft_19-06-11_trialsandguiltypleas-pie-2/), 90% of those facing federal charges plead guilty, 8% have their case dismissed, 2% go to trial.

Of the 2% that go to trial, 83% are found guilty by a jury (or occasionally a judge if they waive their right to trial by jury)

You aren't going to face federal charges unless there is overwhelming evidence that you're guilty and the DOJ is confident they can convince a jury to vote unanimously to convict.

Nice cherry picking.

As of 2018 (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/ft_19-06-11_trialsandguiltypleas-pie-2/), 90% of those facing federal charges plead guilty, 8% have their case dismissed, 2% go to trial.

Of the 2% that go to trial, 83% are found guilty by a jury (or occasionally a judge if they waive their right to trial by jury)

You aren't going to face federal charges unless there is overwhelming evidence that you're guilty and the DOJ is confident they can convince a jury to vote unanimously to convict.

[img ]https://i.gyazo.com/e65ffa3d9692832d0e89fe3d1e71d6c3.png[/img]

Wow! You repeated your cherry picking, only this time with a graph! Very much more convincing thank you!

And I thought I was the only one that noticed Twitch repeating the same things.

What did I cherry pick?  I don't understand.

Do you think I cherry picked the year 2018?  I can't find the numbers for 2019 - if you can let me know.

...
What did I cherry pick?  I don't understand.

Do you think I cherry picked the year 2018?  I can't find the numbers for 2019 - if you can let me know.

Disingenuouscherrypickingtwatsayswhat?

Yes, that is the definition of cherry picking.

As of 2018 (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/ft_19-06-11_trialsandguiltypleas-pie-2/), 90% of those facing federal charges plead guilty, 8% have their case dismissed, 2% go to trial.

Of the 2% that go to trial, 83% are found guilty by a jury (or occasionally a judge if they waive their right to trial by jury)

What statistics did I leave out?


Do you think these numbers are not accurate?

.....

Do you have a point? If so, what? That the 2% that went to trial 83% depleted all their financial resources, that 8% got their cases dismissed by ratting on someone up the chain?

The entire reason you are talking about a Flynn case at all is because he didn't have anything to rat on Trump about because Trump was doing nothing wrong. So your lying cunts that were trying to entrap Trump failed.

Do you have a point? If so, what?

Do you have a point? If so, what?

That's not enough. I really don't get it. Overall, the discussion is about Flynn reversing his guilty plea. Is that material? Is the exact percentage material? It sounds like you agree with Techshare and I that anyone brought into the federal court system by the FBI has overwhelming odds and costs stacked against him.

Do you agree or not that anyone brought into the federal court system by the FBI is a fucked monkey?

If we're going to have a rational discussion, we have to figure which facts we agree on.

Are you willing to do that?

When I post data with sources, and the response is 'nice cherry picking' followed by an argument....do you understand why it doesn't make sense to continue the discussion until we figure out what the actual facts are that we agree on?

I didn't intentionally cherry pick the data.  Maybe I missed something, it's possible - and I'll apologize and admit I made a mistake if so.

If we're going to have a rational discussion, we have to figure which facts we agree on.

Are you willing to do that?

When I post data with sources, and the response is 'nice cherry picking' followed by an argument....do you understand why it doesn't make sense to continue the discussion until we figure out what the actual facts are that we agree on?

I didn't intentionally cherry pick the data.  Maybe I missed something, it's possible - and I'll apologize and admit I made a mistake if so.

Do you agree or not that anyone brought into the federal court system by the FBI is a fucked monkey?

And also. Where is this headed and why? You seriously pushed anti-trump stuff. Anti-kavanaugh. Impeach Trump. Blah blahblaH.

Now it's as if you are denying the facts that Flynn is trying to reverse his guilty plea by proving he's guilty on the internet, while the lying corrupt bunch that tried to do him in have all been fired and many are under criminal investigation.

Seriously, are you track with the actual real world status of the Flynn investigation?

He knows. He would just rather feel right than be right, hence the constant deflection and topic sliding.

Charges against Michael Flynn have just been dropped by the DOJ. Top prosecutor in the case removed himself earlier this Thursday, and all of this is following the release of the memos from the FBI. These have been discussed in these threads already, but the Flynn team have said that these memos (from the FBI) show that the FBI was wrong in how they went about some portions of their investigation.

I know some are not going to be a big fan of Fox here, but this is the best I could do on a breaking news story - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/drops-doj-case-against-michael-flynn-in-wake-of-internal-memo-release

Michael Flynn lost his house trying to pay for the legal fees of defense team. All because the FBI suggested Flynn didn't have a lawyer in his interrogation and because badly motivated FBI agents tried to get him in a perjury trap.

Typical thing for law enforcement to do, they'll tell you that you don't need a lawyer and its kinda on you to figure out if you should have a lawyer present. I think the issue with him is that he was most likely under the impression that he was there regarding an administration matter, and nothing that would come back to haunt him personally.

But yes I did see that he had to put his house up for sale and all that, that's rough. Tough part of the US legal system is that everyday it feels like more and more that its on you to prove innocence instead of the prosecutor having to prove guilt.

Guy has spent years defending himself, and he has to spend LARGE deals of money paying for lawyers. Pretty sure you can't sue a legal entitiy for false accusation, cause then they'd be charging no one with crimes.

The FBI shouldn't be in the business of colluding with each other to determine whether their intention is to set up a perjury trap, getting Flynn to lie under oath. People are saying that Flynn pleaded guilty therefore he must be guilty, completely ignoring the fact the FBI was threatening to go after his son and essentially coerced Flynn into a guilty plea.

It amazes me that people's hate for Trump will overflow onto hating a 3 star general with multiple tours who lost his house and had his life destroyed for the "crime" of working with the Trump administration. Flynn's contact as an incoming National Security official were legal so he didn't have anything to hide.

Typical thing for law enforcement to do, they'll tell you that you don't need a lawyer and its kinda on you to figure out if you should have a lawyer present. I think the issue with him is that he was most likely under the impression that he was there regarding an administration matter, and nothing that would come back to haunt him personally.

But yes I did see that he had to put his house up for sale and all that, that's rough. Tough part of the US legal system is that everyday it feels like more and more that its on you to prove innocence instead of the prosecutor having to prove guilt.

Guy has spent years defending himself, and he has to spend LARGE deals of money paying for lawyers. Pretty sure you can't sue a legal entitiy for false accusation, cause then they'd be charging no one with crimes.

He can't sue the FBI, but he can sue the criminals who were acting under color of law and committed criminal acts in order to manufacture these charges.


Hey TwattySqueal, where did you go? Why don't you bless us all with some more of your ideological blindness fueled delusions and topic sliding.

Charges against Michael Flynn have just been dropped by the DOJ. Top prosecutor in the case removed himself earlier this Thursday, and all of this is following the release of the memos from the FBI. These have been discussed in these threads already, but the Flynn team have said that these memos (from the FBI) show that the FBI was wrong in how they went about some portions of their investigation.

I know some are not going to be a big fan of Fox here, but this is the best I could do on a breaking news story - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/drops-doj-case-against-michael-flynn-in-wake-of-internal-memo-release

In moving to dismiss, the U.S. said an internal review found that Flynn’s false statements to agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation weren’t “material” to the probe into whether Russia interfered in the 2016 election. “The government cannot explain, much less prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, how false statements are ‘material’ to an investigation that ... seems to have been undertaken only to elicit those very false statements and thereby criminalize Mr. Flynn,” U.S. Attorney Timothy Shea said in a brief.

Just a bit of an update here, it is possible for the Judge to reject this and to continue the case if he wants to. Pretty stunning to see the DOJ ....

Pretty stunning to see the FBI resurrect a 300 year old law and try to use it against Flynn, wasn't it? Now how many had been found guilty under that law before Flynn (and not even him, he was done in on the process racket)

The answer would be a whopping zero in the last 150 years. Not a single person has been indicted and convicted for Logan Act violations for over a century because it's a stupid law that has no legal justification. This is what's concerning about FBI agents threatening a 3 star general over violations to an ancient law that isn't applicable in today's standards.

....
I know some are not going to be a big fan of Fox here, but this is the best I could do on a breaking news story - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/drops-doj-case-against-michael-flynn-in-wake-of-internal-memo-release

Pretty stunning to see the FBI resurrect a 300 year old law and try to use it against Flynn, wasn't it?

They didn't resurrect anything. People have been threatening to use that law for a long time. Both sides, republicans and dems have accused various people, on both sides, of having violated it and have said they should be prosecuted for it. It's probably unconstitutional but neither side seems willing to get rid of it since they like the "threat" of it. Regardless, when one looks at the history of it and what a court has actually said in passing about it, you'd have to be pretty stupid to think the FBI could actually make it stick. Not much of a threat.

A bunch of talk about threatening this and that and you agree with me, after the double talk is stripped out.

As far as having to be "pretty stupid to think the FBI could actually make...." note the actual charges were "lying to the FBI." So the old, worthless law in question would do fine as a backdrop for that pre engineered conclusion, right?

"There's more to come from what I understand, and they're going to be far greater than what you've seen so far, and what you've seen so far is incredible, especially as it relates to President Obama," Trump said while speaking with Fox & Friends about Obama's role in the Russia "hoax."

"I believe he and Biden…Sleepy Joe was involved in this also, very much, and other people around President Obama were totally involved," Trump said.

Trump reacted to the news after House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) released 57 interview transcripts on Thursday from the committee's probe to see if the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

The documents show that former United States Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates testified that she was surprised when Obama told her in an Oval Office meeting about the call that Trump's campaign adviser, Michael Flynn, had with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Asked in the interview if Trump would directly confront Obama or Biden, the president said he would rather have the truth come out in documents.

...
They didn't resurrect anything...

Agree with you about what? No it's not stunning....

The courts have already indicated the law is most likely unconstitutional. No one has ever been convicted...

He did lie to them and he admitted it. It's against the law...

Once again though I'll point out that what the FBI did is not illegal...
...

How exactly, could anyone not be a big fan of Fox?

Fox is reporting now that Obama was in the middle of the plot to take down Trump, by going at those such as Flynn, in the effort to get them to rat on Trump. Obama was in the meetings and regularly briefed on the status of the scheme to bring down Trump.

That's not a jab at Fox in particular, I'm just not a big fan of watching people on TV make a big spectacle of things. Would much rather take a deeper dive and read the news from WSJ, NY Times, etc. I feel like you remove some portions of the sensational side of talking heads in the typical media.

Different strokes for different folks though, nothing wrong with that.

I would agree with that. For some odd reasons, even a podcast can convey far more information than the likes of television media. And written pages orders of magnitude more.

Were did you all go? TwattySqueal? SuchGoon? Nutilduuuh? Suddenly none of you want to debate this farce of an investigation any more! Weird...

Update on Michael Flynn -- Federal Judge in his case isn't fully ready to toss the case againt Flynn, as he does have some discretion to prod a bit further on the reasoning. He's asking for input from (legal input) from DOJ, Flynn, other parties to see why exactly this is being done by the DOJ. Not sure what kind of legal discretion he has, but I know he is allowed to ask for input before fully accepting it.

I wouldn't call this breaking news, as some were expecting it to happen as this whole thing came out of left field. But I don't personally think this is going to go anywhere. If anything, he'll just end up getting a pardon from Trump as his base will probably now support that with ease.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-flynn-case-takes-unusual-step-allowing-3rd-party-briefs-n1205811?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

If the judge does not agree, Flynn can simply appeal the case. All the DOJ has to do to reach the desired outcome is to agree with the defendant's position in their first response.

Flynn wins appeal by summary judgement.

Honestly not sure on the legal side of things, you could 100% be right here and I honestly have no idea. Took some basic law classes, but I'm pretty sure most did that as well.

"Judge has asked a retired judge to oppose Justice Dept effort to drop Michael Flynn case and to help to examine if he commited perjury" - Washington Post right now (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/court-asks-retired-judge-to-fight-justice-dept-effort-to-drop-michael-flynn-case-and-examine-if-ex-trump-adviser-committed-perjury/2020/05/13/8c0deb0a-9567-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html)

Seems like the judge wants to know if Flynn committed perjury because he pleaded guilty to a crime and now he is claiming to be innocent.

"John Brennan Concealed 'High-Quality' Intelligence That Russia Wanted Hillary Clinton To Win: Report"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/john-brennan-concealed-high-quality-intelligence-russia-wanted-hillary-clinton-win-report



"In Stunning Move, Flynn Judge Appoints Gotti Prosecutor To Argue Against DOJ Dismissal"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/stunning-move-flynn-judge-appoints-gotti-prosecutor-argue-against-doj-dismissal

Pretty much true, accepted and standard practice that all plea bargainers commit perjury.

What's interesting is that "perjury" is a charge that can be brought by a judge himself toward someone that was in his courtroom. Not by the DOJ and not by some injured party.

AS FAR AS THE LEGALITY of reversing a plea. There are specific rules and conditions for reversing a plea.

Because it's common knowledge that a plea bargain is the defendant swearing to a lie, reversing a plea bargain must be allowed.

If the Judge Sullivan keeps going down this rat hole, it will be another example of someone trying to entrap Trump, and the attempt boomeranging back on them.

...
Yup, seems like the judge wants an independent party to come in and do this instead of making it look like he is biased in some way. Pretty smart decision, and people are most likely going to applaud him for doing so. Makes the most sense given the craziness that this case has already caused

Legality of reversing a plea -- yeah no idea. But yeah, I know that he can reverse on this -- though I did read somewhere that the judge does have a small amount of ability to ask for reasoning for the DOJ to drop his case so abruptly. Not much room for him to intervene here.

Actually, it should be obvious that a change in plea fro "Guilty to Not Guilty" does not imply perjury.

The real question should be why the judge accepted a plea he knew was fake in the first place.

Dude.  Go back and read the documents I posted.

I'll post them again if you want.  But you have to promise to read them and be willing to discuss what they say.

Hey look who it is! TwattySqueal here to die on this hill. Keep defending these frauds and lies regardless of how many facts come out proving it to be baseless and illegal. It is a good look for you.

"Barr: Obama, Biden not under criminal investigation despite Trump's claims"

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/18/obama-biden-not-under-criminal-investigation-despite-trumps-claims/5213295002/


Kind of reminds me of a few months ago...


"U.S. inquiry into FBI, Clinton spurred by Republicans ends without results: Washington Post"

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-investigation/u-s-inquiry-into-fbi-clinton-spurred-by-republicans-ends-without-results-washington-post-idUSKBN1Z905V


Or a couple years ago...


"Report: Trump commission did not find widespread voter fraud"

https://apnews.com/f5f6a73b2af546ee97816bb35e82c18d/Report:-Trump-commission-did-not-find-widespread-voter-fraud

None of this is on topic.

Trump accused the former president of committing the “biggest political crime in American history.”

When asked Monday what crime Obama allegedly committed, Trump replied: “You know what the crime is. The crime is very obvious to everybody, all you have to do is read the newspapers.”

President Donald Trump’s aggressive campaign to encourage sweeping investigations of his predecessor Barack Obama met a unanimous response from Senate Republicans: No thanks.

I wish you were right.  He generally shouldn't be involved directly in the investigation of anyone, especially personal enemies - aside from maybe the voter fraud commission, all he's doing is introducing the appearance of a conflict of interest should any of his enemies actually get indicted.  But he keeps doing it and making it all about himself.  These are not FBI or even congressional investigations...they're Trump Investigations.


"Senate Republicans break with Trump over ‘Obamagate’"


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/11/senate-republicans-trump-obamagate-249734

"Justice department opens criminal inquiry into origins of Russia investigation"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/24/justice-department-opens-criminal-inquiry-into-origins-of-russia-investigation-source

"Barr: Obama, Biden not under criminal investigation despite Trump's claims"

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/18/obama-biden-not-under-criminal-investigation-despite-trumps-claims/5213295002/

"Senate Republicans break with Trump over ‘Obamagate’"


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/11/senate-republicans-trump-obamagate-24973

....
I don't think it was off topic when you posted about the same investigation in this thread 7 months ago when it was opened.  Pretty sure that this is also what Trump is talking about when he says 'OBAMA-GATE!' 'biggest political crime in American history!'....

The part of this which is notable is that this thread is REEEE, created due to and in response to censorship of the original thread.

REEEE was a repository for posts which were deleted by abusive moderators or self moderated threads.

Now those threads have starved themselves out, leaving ONLY the REEEE threads (predictable, at least to some of us.

Yep. First they create a censored thread, it dies. I create an open thread. They run out of arguments knowing that their communist overlord moderator will not move their off topic posts, they then strip my ability to have a discussion again with topic sliding. FREE SPEECH!

'‘No Vacancies’ for Blacks: How Donald Trump Got His Start, and Was First Accused of Bias'

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/politics/donald-trump-housing-race.html


The deep state has been after Trump since 1973 when he was 27 years old!

The operative word being "accused". Again, nice topic sliding. You know you got your ass hammered with the fraudulent Trump investigations that turned up nothing so you are desperately searching for anything to distract from that.

If anyone got their ass hammered from the Mueller investigation it was his Campaign Chair and Personal Lawyer.  They're safe now serving the rest of their prison terms out at home due to the pandemic though, don't worry.

Michael Cohen was convicted of tax fraud...

Michael Cohen was convicted of tax fraud and perjuring himself in front of congress. None of this has anything to do with Russia, or Trump, except for the fact that he served as his lawyer. You enjoy your back breaking mental gymnastics to try to spin this as some kind of evidence of this massively destructive Russia collusion investigation being justified regardless.

The investigation was into Russian interference in the 2016 election.  The investigation revealed exactly how they did it, which will make it easier to stop it from happening again. 
There were many links to and contacts between the Russian government and members of the Trump campaign which were investigated, but that only made up chapter 4 of the report.
The destructiveness came from Trump bitching and crying every single day and obstructing the investigation.

You should read it: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Also, Cohen was convicted of making an excessive campaign contribution at the request of a candidate for the "principal purpose of influencing election".  You're right it has nothing to do with Russia though.

PS: did you know before Manafort was running Trumps campaign he made millions helping Putins top choice get elected in Ukraine?  (Ukraine and Russia are enemies, fyi)  That's the money he didn't pay taxes on. Money he made by helping Russia influence a different presidential election.

Revealed exactly how they did what?

How they interfered in the 2016 election.

Could you possibly be any more vague? Also what would make this different than any other election previous? Are you suggesting they suddenly started doing this in 2016?

On occasion, the Conspirators facilitated bitcoin payments using the same computers that
they used to conduct their hacking activity, including to create and send test spearphishing emails.

Additionally, one of these dedicated accounts was used by the Conspirators in or around 2015 to
renew the registration of a domain (linuxkrnlnet) encoded in certain X-Agent malware installed
on the DNC network.

The Conspirators funded the purchase of computer infrastructure for their hacking activity
in part by “mining” bitcoin. Individuals and entities can mine bitcoin by allowing their computing
power to be used to verify and record payments on the bitcoin public ledger, a service for which
they are rewarded with freshly-minted bitcoin. The pool of bitcoin generated from the GRU’s
mining activity was used, for example, to pay a Romanian company to register the domain
dcleaks.com through a payment processing company located in the United States.

In addition to mining bitcoin, the Conspirators acquired bitcoin through a variety of means
designed to obscure the origin ofthe funds. This included purchasing bitcoin through peer-to-peer
exchanges, moving funds through other digital currencies, and using pre-paid cards. They also
enlisted the assistance of one or more third—party exchangers who facilitated layered transactions
through digital currency exchange platforms providing heightened anonymity

The Conspirators used the same funding structure—and in some cases, the very same pool
of fundsito purchase key accounts, servers, and domains used in their election—related hacking
activity.

a. The bitcoin mining operation that funded the registration payment for dcleaks.com
also sent newly-minted bitcoin to a bitcoin address controlled by “Daniel Farell,”
the persona that was used to renew the domain linuxkrnlnet. The bitcoin mining
operation also funded, through the same bitcoin address, the purchase of servers
and domains used in the GRU’s spearphishing operations, including accountsqooqle.com and account—gooogle.com.

b. On or about March 14, 2016, using funds in a bitcoin address, the Conspirators
purchased a VPN account, which they later used to log into the @Guccifer_2
Twitter account. The remaining funds from that bitcoin address were then used on
or about April 28, 2016, to lease a Malaysian server that hosted the dcleaks.com
website.

c. The Conspirators used a different set of fictitious names (including “Ward
DeClaur” and “Mike Long”) to send bitcoin to a US. company in order to lease a
server used to administer X-Tunnel malware implanted on the DCCC and DNC
networks, and to lease two servers used to hack the DNC’s cloud network.

I like how you make the baseless claim of Russian collusion and move the goal posts to Ukraine so you can pretend you have an argument as we delve into yet another baseless accusation.

90% of that garbage has been proven false. Good try tho digging up corpses of arguments long dead to try to pretend you still have a point.

You should read the report.   https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

https://i.gyazo.com/225680252c3ee45e292bc631160fb128.png
https://i.gyazo.com/af86e5b36a40c5d9ec82001a79218b85.png

---

Also check out the Russian indictments.  Here is an example of how much Mueller uncovered:

---

You wouldn't say that if you would have actually read the report.  It's willful ignorance at this point.

https://i.gyazo.com/a8a7fc5a5f46473f58992234ac31470e.png
https://i.gyazo.com/8b11c10a23a861c0d17688b6878df8ad.png

Which 10% is true has not been proven false?

i didnt make it to read about these parts lol its more interesting than i thought

so paul manafort was convincing russia that if trump won then trump would help russia take over ukraine.  ukraine is our ally russia is our enemy so thats awful.  but trump probably had nothing to do with this part of it, manafort just saw it as win win since hes friends with trump and also the oligarchs right?  all this must have just given russia even more motivation.

"You know, the people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were, And you have to look at that, also. Now, that was under -- just so you understand, that was done under Obama's administration. ... Crimea has been taken. Don't blame Donald Trump for that."

Whether or not Trump was aware of or involved in Manafort offering Russia support in dealing with Ukraine (and keeping crimea, the part of Ukraine that Russia had recently invaded), while also passing along campaign info to oligarchs is something that Mueller was not able to prove. 

If Trump didn't know then there are a ton of crazy coincidences.

For example, we know that on July 29, Manafort tells Kilimnik that Aug 2 would be a good date to meet in NYC.

Trump ABC interview on July 31:

https://i.gyazo.com/c83197dd7bd78b410313efce8d7563fd.png
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf (page 139)

Whether or not Trump was aware of or involved in Manafort offering Russia support in dealing with Ukraine (and keeping crimea, the part of Ukraine that Russia had recently invaded), while also passing along campaign info to oligarchs is something that Mueller was not able to prove. 

If Trump didn't know then there are a ton of crazy coincidences.

For example, we know that on July 29, Manafort tells Kilimnik that Aug 2 would be a good date to meet in NYC.

Trump ABC interview on July 31:

https://i.gyazo.com/c83197dd7bd78b410313efce8d7563fd.png
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf (page 139)