Flynn charged with one count of making false statement

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

I can't wait to see who else gets indicted...This is just the beginning.

Seems like the Emperor's new clothes might be coming more clear day by day.

This is a perfect example of the left's almost psychotic level of desire to see Trump not only fail, but go down in flames no matter the cost. It's like they lack closure to their election failures and this is all they have left. The left villagers with their pitchforks and torches have been screaming IMPEACH HIM!! before he even entered office on day one...lol

So far nothing, zilch, nada... We need to remember that Trump fired him very quickly, and even with all that there is most likely nothing there even with him holding back information. To think Flynn is a smoking gun to Trump's totally unsubstantiated Russian collusion after a year and millions spent on it is like a last ditch effort of hopes and prayers.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Nobody has addressed my question: Flynn contacted the Russian ambassador. So what? What law is that supposed to be breaking?

No law was broken by talking to Russians.

Lying to the FBI about meeting / contacts with Russians is the crime.

Technically, that's not true. Subverting the foreign policy of the sitting President would be a violation of the Logan Act and that's exactly what happened.

That said, only two people have ever been prosecuted under the Logan Act in its more than two century existence and nobody has been convicted so it's pretty toothless and it's singular purpose seems to be making political claims of criminal malfeasance.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Ok .... so?

a reply to: ketsuko

It's a comparison.

No, it isn't. The point is not the firing but the due process in the legal process after being charged with a crime, hence the original reply.

a reply to: xuenchen

i still don't know how some idiot made it a felony to fib to fbi . hell if it was for all leos i would be in prison for next 300 years

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Liquesence

It's a comparison.

You think firing someone is evil and autocratic?

Or is it only that way because Trump does it?

Due process is the requirement that an entity acting under color of law recognize and respect all rights due a citizen.

Firing someone is in no way shape or form linked to due process.

Investigating / charging / prosecuting a person is.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert
You cannot bring an administration down with only assumptions.

That has not stopped the left from trying.

What assumptions were used in an attempt to bring the admin down?

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Nobody has addressed my question: Flynn contacted the Russian ambassador. So what? What law is that supposed to be breaking?

No law was broken by talking to Russians.

Lying to the FBI about meeting / contacts with Russians is the crime.

Technically, that's not true. Subverting the foreign policy of the sitting President would be a violation of the Logan Act and that's exactly what happened.

That said, only two people have ever been prosecuted under the Logan Act in its more than two century existence and nobody has been convicted so it's pretty toothless and it's singular purpose seems to be making political claims of criminal malfeasance.

Your'e reaching a little there. The incoming President telling a foreign country we're gonna do xyz once I get into office wouldn't be a violation of the Logan Act. Literally every campaign talks about doing something different with foreign policy if they get elected.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

Ok .... so?

Yeah it means there is nothing there that was illegal. It means the law violation was lying to the FBI when questioned and nothing more.

a reply to: Liquesence

And ... the original post was that it seems both Trump and Mueller did the right thing - got rid of Flynn. You responded as if firing someone which Trump had every right and the power to do was a bad thing because Trump didn't like due process ... as if he should have waited for Mueller to convict Flynn and just left him in his capacity despite his apparently very real flaws which had been uncovered before then.

So, which is it?

Do you think Trump should have just left Flynn in his position to wait for Mueller to convict him? Oh, silly me, of course you do, more time for Flynn to bring down the admin that way!

a reply to: queenofswords

The nsa/cia/ whoever would be monitoring the russian and there is no problem with that. The problem comes when without a crime or a threat to national security the american citizen is unmasked.
The bigger problem comes when illegally obtained intelligence is given to the fbi to manufacture a charge of lying to the fbi.
If the fbi does not have this intelligence how can they prove Flynn lied?
Another problem comes when this intelligence info was leaked to the nyt and wapo.

I really wonder if Mueller understands the can of worms he opened here.
Obama "warning" trump about flynn only makes this worse. Was obama spying on his own government officials?

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: grey580
www.vox.com...



Now this should be interesting.

ABC News’ @BrianRoss reports that Flynn is prepared to testify President Trump directed him to make contact with Russians

Yeah its spin to try and portray this as something its not.

All transitions make contact with foreign governments before they take the reigns on inauguration day. It is called transition for a reason.

Exactly. Trump was the president-elect. It damn sure was his business to contact foreign governments. The only question in my mind is why Flynn would lie about what seems like a very minor & inconsequential matter: a discussion concerning Russia's reaction to sanctions.

a reply to: face23785

Obama was telling Russia all about how flexible he was going to be prior to his second election over a hot mic.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert
You cannot bring an administration down with only assumptions.

That has not stopped the left from trying.

What assumptions were used in an attempt to bring the admin down?

Repeating Russia, collusion, election tampering and Trump as often as possible even though it was false. You can see it in this thread with certain members invoking Trump when he has nothing to do with Flynn lying to the FBI. They did the same thing with Manafort and the other 2 guys who were indicted. All crimes there took place almost a decade ago yet they rep3eat trumps name as often as possible.

Just like repeating Trump and Russia collusion as often as they can...
and Democrats calling for impeachment with nothing other than they dont like Trump.

Trumps staff is quitting in droves. Heading for the lifeboats....

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gandalf77

Look, the alphabet agencies ROUTINELY monitor conversations with people like Kislyak. It's called signals intelligence.

yeah I understand that...I was trained to repair and maintain some of that gear while i served

Why? Because "diplomats" tend to moonlight as spies. So it's kind of in the interest of national security.

yep you are correct...foreign nationals are fair targets...
you know who are not? AMERICAN CITIZENS WITHIN THE USA
Flynn speaking to a russian is not illegal
To prove Flynn spoke to that russian, Flynn would have had to be unmasked. There are also specific rules for that.

By charging Flynn with lying to the fbi about speaking to a russian Mueller has ADMITTED that the ic of the usa was spying on the incoming opposition party.

1. American citizens absolutely ARE fair targets where matters of national security are concerned. Flynn was unmasked because it was necessary to fully understand the conversation. It's perfectly legal.

2. Mueller has admitted no such thing. The American IC was monitoring one of Russia's biggest spies talking to another individual who happened to be Flynn. They weren't spying on the incoming opposition party. That's just partisan BS.

And, incidentally, where was the uproar from the right when Shrub and Darth Cheney were spying on Americans--and shamelessly tried to get that program reauthorized by an ailing Ashcroft?
Furthermore, who went to bat on behalf of the American people? None other than Comey and Mueller, that's who.

It's good to know there are still folks out there who will put people and principles before party, politics, and power.

Since this is the topic on many peoples minds, the following can be stated:

This is an active investigation, and the special prosecutor has managed to keep this as silent as possible, along with a lid on all of the possible leaks, only letting out information once it is go time. And the special prosecutor has a long road to work through, taking time and effort to get to the truth, to figure out who did what, and who knew about it, along with how far up the chain it really goes. The rest is speculation.

Now Michael Flynn, interesting man, long career in the military, retired, and now in trouble with the law. He was working for Turkey during the election, and even the initial reports stated that the let the Trump team know, yet he was kept on. And there were probably more charges that he could have been nailed with, like conspiracy to commit. However, he is only getting one charge put on him, so as others have pointed out, he is giving up information, probably verifiable information and new information. Chances are that a deal was reached long before this, an offer was placed on the table with a running clock. And at the last moment, he took the deal in exchange for a lesser charge.

What all he stated, and is unknown, who all they are going after next, no one really knows, however, it is an interesting look into the process that they are taking, and it is like a spiral that ever turning towards the president, the outlying people who are being charged, had far greater rolls during and after the campaign than is being admitted.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: face23785

Obama was telling Russia all about how flexible he was going to be prior to his second election over a hot mic.

That's not really the same thing. He was still the sitting President, he can't subvert his own foreign policy.

It still sounds an awful lot like colluding though.

a reply to: ketsuko

I wasn't talking about firing Flynn as being autocratic on Trump's part.

I was just talking about Trump being autocratic in general.

Point was due process after a suspected crime is committed and being charged, hence Flynn.

Keep up. Or did the jab at Trump trigger you. Appears so.

originally posted by: olaru12
Trumps staff is quitting in droves. Heading for the lifeboats....

Can't blame them. It can't be fun with a special prosecutor crawling up everyone's ass looking for anything, related to Russia or not, to justify all the time and money he's spent investigating. They might have unpaid parking tickets a few blocks from the Russian embassy or something, and their names will be all over the news.