It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mike Flynn Offers to Testify in Exchange for Immunity - The Wall Street Journal

page: 11
92
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: diggindirt

We?
Not me dude. I stay clean I have no reason to ask for immunity.
Where were you when Bryan Pagliano asked and everyone swore it was because he did something to help Hillary commit a crime ???


Don't recall that particular case but if I was commenting I was saying the same thing I'm saying now. When life walks up to you and smacks you in the face, you might change your mind too. I was clean. I had done nothing illegal but others in the business had done wrong and I had no idea if I had been involved or not. You cannot control what others around you do and there are times when you can be swept where you never imagined you would be.




posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: diggindirt

We?
Not me dude. I stay clean I have no reason to ask for immunity.
Where were you when Bryan Pagliano asked and everyone swore it was because he did something to help Hillary commit a crime ???


Don't recall that particular case but if I was commenting I was saying the same thing I'm saying now. When life walks up to you and smacks you in the face, you might change your mind too. I was clean. I had done nothing illegal but others in the business had done wrong and I had no idea if I had been involved or not. You cannot control what others around you do and there are times when you can be swept where you never imagined you would be.


So by this logic, Flynn wants immunity because of what Mr. Trump or someone on the transition team did?



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The president looks lost because he is in over his head. He is not running the show. He has a team of extremists guiding policies. He will never succeed because America is a county of moderation. A country of understanding. A place where caring for others supersedes caring for ones self.

We are a Christian country that strives to live by the golden rule.

He hired the wrong people. And they are in charge.

It not going to last. (Thank god)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The president looks lost because he is in over his head. He is not running the show. He has a team of extremists guiding policies. He will never succeed because America is a county of moderation. A country of understanding. A place where caring for others supersedes caring for ones self.

We are a Christian country that strives to live by the golden rule.

He hired the wrong people. And they are in charge.

Its not going to last. (Thank god)

edit on 30-3-2017 by chaeone86 because: Typo



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Maybe what Flynn has to say was that he was intentionally planted in order to push the Russia story in an effort to discredit Trump. He did work for Obama.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Queen for a Day perhaps?


Just what is a proffer and what are the perils of entering into a proffer agreement (also known as a proffer letter) with the federal government? Proffer or "queen for a day" letters are written agreements between federal prosecutors and individuals under criminal investigation which permit these individuals to tell the government about their knowledge of crimes, with the supposed assurance that their words will not be used against them in any later proceedings. (The individuals can either be witnesses, subjects or targets of a federal investigation, although it is subjects and targets who provide most proffers.)

If you enter into one of these agreements, you will proffer information orally in a proffer or queen for a day "session" attended by you, your attorney, the Assistant U.S. Attorney ("AUSA") and one or more federal agents. (In recent times, regulatory attorneys have been attending proffer sessions, when the government is engaged in parallel civil and criminal investigations.) You should think of a proffer session as a sneak preview in which you show the federal authorities what you can bring to the table if they cut a deal with you. - See more at: corporate.findlaw.com...

Source


If Flynn has been rebuffed to this point it could very well be that he's not giving them what they want quite yet and they're calling his bluff if they have him dead to rights in the communications that were picked up.

So far it seems negotiations are still ongoing an it's a fluid situation. Not sure what to think myself, but Flynns' attempt to negotiate a deal doesn't look good for those who are under the impression there's nothing to see in regards to Russian collusion.

The noose tightens even more.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

They see this as some silly game between the left and the right. But the implications are more grave than conservative or liberal and the very fabric of democracy and the balance of world powers is in play.
I'm not being dramatic.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
Maybe what Flynn has to say was that he was intentionally planted in order to push the Russia story in an effort to discredit Trump. He did work for Obama.



Ah, that sneaky Obama.... I knew it.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

No, and I also don't believe Flynn is completely innocent either (surprise!!). I'll wait for more evidence however.


We already know that Flynn isn't completely innocent. It's a point of fact that he's done some sketchy #. The question is whether any of it is criminal. You can also bet that his lawyers have been in touch with the White House too.

There's a few ways I could see Flynn's testimony playing out. Most but not all would be bad for the administration but one thing I don't believe Flynn would do is cop to something that could paint him as a traitor unless he's part of a conspiracy and he knows/strongly suspects that he's going down and possibly scapegoated.

It could just be that he's afraid of getting caught up in something unrelated to Russia like his Turkish lobbying shenanigans. He might have information about somebody else. Another scenario that can't be ruled out is that he's coordinating with the adminstration to quash the investigation or possibly send it off in another direction.

It's odd that apparently nobody has yet taken him up on his offer. Smells weird. Then again, the whole mess is a debacle, spiraling deeper every day.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

He wants immunity because that is the practical thing to do when you don't know all there is to know about a case. He seeks to clear his name if the attorney letter is real. I don't know what he knows but he knows that he doesn't know everything there is to know about the case.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Have you considered that if he is testifying it's about the Obama White House?



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

Sorry for such a short reply (I'm being called in to help a client) but there is zero chance that letter is real. If it is, Flynn needs a much better lawyer.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:49 PM
link   
The latest from Barton Gellman tcf.org...

This is so ugly for Team Trump.


The intelligence chairman’s sources, according to the New York Times, were a pair of Trump appointees: Ezra Cohen-Watnick, a detailee from the Defense Intelligence Agency who is senior director for intelligence at the National Security Council, and Michael Ellis, an assistant White House counsel for national security affairs. They are not just any presidential appointees. National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster recently tried to fire Cohen-Watnick, a holdover selected by his predecessor, Michael Flynn, and Trump himself ordered McMaster to stand down. Ellis, the White House lawyer, used to work for Nunes on the intelligence committee.


I knew Michael Ellis was Nunes' source. I posted that somewhere on ATS 2 days ago.

His question, and it's a good one:

Were the president’s men using the surveillance assets of the U.S. government to track the FBI investigation from the outside?

edit on 3/30/2017 by Olivine because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   
It all looks very bad for Trump.

I have seen some of his recent twitter posts and it looks like he feels cornered.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: Gryphon66

He wants immunity because that is the practical thing to do when you don't know all there is to know about a case. He seeks to clear his name if the attorney letter is real. I don't know what he knows but he knows that he doesn't know everything there is to know about the case.


Right. I don't disagree.

But he has knowledge or strong suspicion that there is something indictable close enough to him to matter.

Because most people will have the same reaction that most people had here at ATS: if you're not guilty, why are you looking for cover?



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
Maybe what Flynn has to say was that he was intentionally planted in order to push the Russia story in an effort to discredit Trump. He did work for Obama.



Hmmm.

We kinda touched on that possibility when the Flynn story first came up.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
It all looks very bad for Trump.

I have seen some of his recent twitter posts and it looks like he feels cornered.


Wild thought: can the President order a nuclear strike in country?

Yes, I'm serious.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I'm glad you weighed in. Your post highlights one very important fact. We have no idea what he knows or is willing to divulge.

In a later post, I mentioned that it is possible the committee already knows what he's wanting to say. Now how would they get that information? Otherwise they is a narrative at work here and they don't want his testimony in the way of it. It is a very odd situation.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: chaeone86

You mean an imperialistic, authoritarian Country founded on Colonialism

and those founding fathers people have high regard for


“The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
—John Adams



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Christosterone

Huzzah! Beautifully written by a real American!







 
92
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join