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-releaseJust 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. But given that the context is the FBI investigation of Russia Collusion, I assume the Logan Act was simply the justification for entrapping Flynn into some charges of lying. So we've got a three star General, now a "convicted felon" who was forced into a plea bargain of guilty, from a corrupt illegal entrapment wrapped inside a fake investigation wrapped inside a failed coup. |
|
|
|
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-releaseJust 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) |
|
|
|
They made a movie out of it. Covid has been....
Prior to the completion of the full-length documentary we'll be releasing a series of vignettes. The first installment features renowned scientist, Judy Mikovits PHD......
Renowned? Don't think so. https://www.snopes.com/?s=mikovitsWas a Scientist Jailed After Discovering a Deadly Virus Delivered Through Vaccines? Judy Mikovits did not discover a deadly virus delivered through vaccines; she was arrested for allegedly stealing equipment belonging to the Institute that fired her. |
|
|
|
I understand that things have changed, yes, but these thinkers are now deemed Republican and Conservative and that's what people are going to refer to them as. If liberal people with similiar thoughts to RBG was appointed and confirmed to the court, we would say that the court is moving towards the left.
Unsure on what your argument really is here. I feel like this is an argument for just the sake of arguing. I am very sorry you don't understand the meaning of The Overton Window, and how an extremist left would make moderates appear more conservative in comparison. Just to start, I identify myself as a conservative. Wouldn't that go the same way if Conservatives were going farther and farther to the right? The people on the left would look more moderate. You're literally arguing based on your own viewpoint, that's it. I would assume that Twitchy and Flying Hellfish would both sit here and argue that the people on the left are moderate while the people on the right are bat shit crazy. I'm not trying to gang up with Tech to hammer you on this, it just happens that I don't agree with the casting of the argument as a "Left leaning or Right leaning" court. What's Roberts? It seems to me that the "Middle" would simply be to make decisions according to the constitution and the history of interpretations. Then you would have Left who would simply pursue ideological progressive concepts, really not caring about what the constitution said. And you'd have Right, conceivably who would also not care about what the constitution said. But the latter, it does not exist. The "Right" is always those who attempt to just follow the constitution. I see this as a framing of the argument, let's say by progressive media and progressive politicians, to attempt to make any decisions other that those they favor as "far Right." Now then, people are suckered into the pre existing framing of the argument. A decent question is have you (everyone) been duped? Next you'll be trying to argue that Kavanaugh was a right wing extremist rapist, that Flynn was a convicted felon and a treason, that Trump is an agent of Putin. Clearly all these dangerous menaces of "far right Extremists" must be not allowed to walk and talk freely. So what is is? Is "far Right" simply anything that's different than what these perverted Leftish Authoritarian Control Freaks figure at the moment is the party line? |
|
|
|
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. I'd contribute to a fund for him to go after those individuals in civil court. Twitchy is batting a perfect score so far on wrongness. Impeachment, Kavanaugh, Flynn,Orange Bad Man. I'm only prone to complain when it sounds like an alternate reality. Maybe quite a few of the Trump haters do live in an alternate reality. Let me guess. Mueller, Comey, Rosenstein, Struck, Brenner, Clapper, Valiant Crusaders for the Good? |
|
|
|
They didn't go anywhere. Some people died at WTC but no deaths anywhere else. Even lucky Larry survived, what are the odds there, he just happened to take a day off that day. Nothing is anti american, like I said 9/11 stinks of British and Israeli intelligence.
I guess you already watched the 2hr video in 15 minutes and have your report on it.
No, there is a complete list of every person who died on the four airplanes. Your version of 911 and your posts reek of pro-Saudi Islamic propaganda. If not, then list where those people missing from their families who said they got on one of those planes are today. Go ahead, prove it to the world. Here is your chance. I'll make it easy. Just show how half of those people are imaginary people with imaginary families. |
|
|
|
This is very informative if you can stand the 2 hrs . the presenter is a lab lady not a professional speaker so she slow at times but she lay's out evidence that pretty much only Splendy can refute.
....
You are welcome to write those arguments down and I'll be happy to refute them. As for your latest garbage... NO PLANES? Where did all those people that got on those planes go to? I don't think the families of these people agree with you. Now you are 100% inside anti-American, funded propaganda. Duhh... 265 fatalities aboard the 4 planes include[84] 87 civilians (including 11 crew members) and the five hijackers aboard American Airlines Flight 11; 60 civilians (including 9 crew members) and the five hijackers aboard United Airlines Flight 175;[85] 59 passengers (including 6 crew members) and the five hijackers aboard American Airlines Flight 77; and 39 civilians (including 7 crew members), a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officer,[86] and the four hijackers aboard United Airlines Flight 93.[87][88] The dead included eight children: five on American Airlines Flight 77, aged 3 to 11,[89] and three on United Airlines Flight 175, aged 2, 3, and 4.[90] The youngest victim was a two-and-a-half-year-old child on Flight 175 and the oldest was an 85-year-old passenger on Flight 11.[91] Among those killed were television producer David Angell, who co-created the sitcom Frasier,[92] and actress Berry Berenson,[93] both passengers on Flight 11. Barbara Olson, television political commentator and the wife of then-U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, was aboard Flight 77.[94] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_September_11_attacks#List_of_the_dead |
|
|
|
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-releaseMichael 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. Do you mean that someone brought into the federal court system by the FBI shouldn't automatically be a fucked monkey? Don't you have to make exceptions for carefully orchestrated deep state coups to overturn the Orange Man BAD? |
|
|
|
That was a joke, you know a meme. You're too dense to even pick up on that. let me bring it down to your level of problem solving. this is all the evidence you will ever need.
...
No, nothing there to discuss. Pictures and faces. Possibly, maybe related to some ten year old bag of shit conspiracy theory. Probably funded and pushed by Iran. No, I don't much waste time guessing at the inner thoughts of people. The outer results of their/your actions can be discussed such as "Pushing this ridiculous 911 truther theory benefits the cause of radical Islamists such as in Iran." But you talk like that because... You didn't lose anybody, and 9/11 didn't affect you personally... Because 9/11 affected you personally, and since you can't do anything about it, you are trying to ignore it... Because you are too ignorant to see that the official story doesn't fit the facts by a long shot... Because you think that since it's done, lets just get on with our lives... Because you are a damage control cleaner for the inside-job people... you know, like paid.  Yes, just be sure that the max percentage of your posts benefit anti-American, radical Islamist operations. And fomenting 911truther trash does just that. Very obsolete, of course, and quite boring. |
|
|
|
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. Maybe, but the real world here is a full blown CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION into the way the prosecutor's handled the Flynn matter. That's not "Republican or Democrat." That's simply the current status of a matter in the real world. It may be that some real world aspects are actively suppressed. For example if we go check the Huff Post, will there be zero coverage of the above mentioned criminal investigation? That would be interesting. Maybe Twitch could inform us of such a distortion ? |
|
|
|
That was a joke, you know a meme. You're too dense to even pick up on that. let me bring it down to your level of problem solving. this is all the evidence you will ever need.
...
No, nothing there to discuss. Pictures and faces. Possibly, maybe related to some ten year old bag of shit conspiracy theory. Probably funded and pushed by Iran. No, I don't much waste time guessing at the inner thoughts of people. The outer results of their/your actions can be discussed such as "Pushing this ridiculous 911 truther theory benefits the cause of radical Islamists such as in Iran." |
|
|
|
What do you expect to gain from passive aggressively insulting squatz' intelligence?
I honestly think he's getting back at his father, who must have done a real number on him. But it's a step up from commissioning 12 year olds to draw cartoons of people he doesn't like with their dicks out and goats next to them. There may be many goats in the closets... |
|
|
|
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. 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? |
|
|
|
...
Do you have a point? If so, what? Yes. The data isn't cherry picked. [/quote] 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? |
|
|
|
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. 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. |
|
|
|
....
I understand that things have changed, yes, but these thinkers are now deemed Republican and Conservative and that's what people are going to refer to them as. If liberal people with similiar thoughts to RBG was appointed and confirmed to the court, we would say that the court is moving towards the left.
....
I don't think you can lay it out that easily. First of all, "The Left" has moved to a lunatic fringe of where it was ten years ago. Second, "The Right" in many respects is not "Conservative", not in the least. But of course that's just me talking, reflecting on the shitshow of Kavanaugh. |
|
|
|
let me bring it down to your level of problem solving. this is all the evidence you will ever need.
...
No, nothing there to discuss. Pictures and faces. Possibly, maybe related to some ten year old bag of shit conspiracy theory. Probably funded and pushed by Iran. |
|
|
|
....
Lol, the Ivanka comment. I'm expecting another term for Trump and for him to move the court further to the right -- or to cement the fact that the court is going to have a conservative balance for the next 20 or so years.
Come on guys, you can't be so conservative (or right) to the point of thinking conservative thinkers are moderates.
.... Supreme Court seems to kind of beat their own drum up there, more than being decisively "conservative or liberal." A better way to ask it might be something like "Is this an independent thinker, or someone who will always follow orders like a puppet, when the political master calls." The latter is a serious problem, and is part of the process of downfall of nations. |
|
|
|
...
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.
trying to argue, maybe he's got a 17% chance in this rigged system... What are you DOING? There is a guy named Flynn, who is trying to get out of this contrived, rigged politically motivated scam of a court process. I am only describing it. Are you advocating the process? His guilt? Anything that promotes "Orange Man Bad?" |
|
|
|
what explanation would anyone require, I posted a pic of the pentagon, even people in Africa know what that is. The pic had fire hoses, which usually means during or just after a fire, there is your time as well. Iin a 9/11 thread most people would have figured this out. I'm really starting to think gr8 was the last year you and franky went to school. That part may not be an explosion but neither the hole or the front of the pentagon pic is consistent with a plane crash, that's why I showed you the black marker...
A correction. You didn't show me anything. You posted some pict with no link, no explanation, nothing. So now you get exactly what you deserve... What black marker? No, you did not post a picture of the Pentagon. You posted a pic of a hole in the wall. Good luck with getting understood by people doing that. Do you mind a suggestion. Try to be very clear when you make an assertion, and use pictures. I still have no clue "what black marker." Not going to go rummage around and hunt for one, because then... 'uh...is this the right black marker?' |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
