Gen. Flynn sentencing reccomendation complete - no jail time

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Not only are you correct but additionally the SC doesn’t want to go to court. In a trial all of his shady evidence would be open to discovery and scrutiny. That means that he needs to offer his victims attractive enough sentencing terms to agree. You can also believe that his victims must also agree not to further complain or challenge anything that occurred during the course of the SCs interrogations.

How can this kind of injustice stand?

a reply to: BlackJackal

And?

It is expected his transition team contacted foreign governments and began planning for his incoming administration. Not illegal. Nothing he did was contrary to existing Obama policies at the time, and his own agenda is all that matters once he took office.

Regardless, NONE OF THAT has anything to do with "Collusion" that in your kind's own words "stole the election" from leftist trash.

He can't "collude" to win an election after the fact. Besides, you are clueless when it comes to conspiracy under 18 USC. Google it, read it, study it...study it intently, then get back to me. If you have any questions of what words mean (legal terms, or basics like "I" "The" "Individual" or "Burden of proof") then don't be ashamed to ask for help. You can do it big guy.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Sillyolme

You couod be right.

And hey, if there were real crimes involving collusion, I hope they are found.

What I am baffled by is muellers tactics.

You must be more inteligent than me, because you seem to be suggesting that mueller went after flynn, found a crime he committed, and then rewarded him with a light punishment for cooperating.

But I learned from the fbi in the hillary investigation that the way to really get criminals is to grant everyone immunity up front, smash all of their devices for them so their is no evidence, and then look for crimes.

I wonder why the different tactics being used here?

Seriously? You don't understand the different tactics?

It's simple; the DOJ was simply following the law and DOJ policy, as spelled out in the US Attorneys Manual. Here's a pointer to it:

www.justice.gov...

The relevant parts are:

"This chapter contains the Department's policy and procedures for seeking "use immunity" under Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 6001-6005. Sections 6001 to 6005 provide a mechanism by which the government may apply to the court for an order granting a witness limited immunity in all judicial, administrative, and congressional proceedings when the witness asserts his or her privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment."

Brian Pagliano, who was Clinton's IT person in charge of her private server, HAD invoked his Fifth Amendment privileges, so he was a candidate for being given immunity to compel him to testify on what he knew about the operation of her email system.

When evaluating whether a potential witness should be granted immunity, the US Attorney in charge of the case is supposed to consider:


The importance of the investigation or prosecution to effective enforcement of the criminal laws;
The value of the person's testimony or information to the investigation or prosecution;
The likelihood of prompt and full compliance with a compulsion order, and the effectiveness of available sanctions if there is no such compliance;
The person's relative culpability in connection with the offense or offenses being investigated or prosecuted, and his or her criminal history;
The possibility of successfully prosecuting the person prior to compelling his or her testimony;
The likelihood of adverse collateral consequences to the person if he or she testifies under a compulsion order.

In Pagliano's case, his testimony was obviously important, he complied fully and promptly, and he apparently had no culpability in any crime that Hilary might have committed. For that reason, there was probably no possibility of prosecuting him for anything, and there were no significant adverse consequences for him testifying under compulsion.

In other words, he seemed to be a perfect candidate for granting immunity in exchange for compelling his testimony.

On the other hand, Flynn originally claimed Fifth Amendment privileges, but then withdrew them. At that point, he was no longer a candidate for immunity, under DOJ rules. In addition, it was pretty clear that Flynn probably was culpable of several crimes (the details were presented yesterday during his sentencing hearing) and for that reason would probably not have been a candidate even if he had asserted Fifth Amendment privileges.

Isn't it amazing what 5 minutes of research using Google and Wikipedia can turn up?

Doesn't Hillary look like someone who knows her time of freedom is nearing its end?
twitter.com...

a reply to: carewemust

She looks like she is well medicated.

Moves eyebrows up and down suggestively

Imagine...

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Glad to hear that Flynn was able to provide "substantial assistance" in the "Clinton Foundation Criminal Investigation"! From what I understand Flynn hated Andrew McCabe, so hopefully he was able to contribute to that investigation as well.

a reply to: BlackJackal

And if that turns out to not be the case?

Something I just read that reeks with irony:

Trump asked FBI Director Comey to "go easy on Flynn" in 2017.

Mueller asked the court to "go easy on Flynn" yesterday.

originally posted by: carewemust
Something I just read that reeks with irony:

Trump asked FBI Director Comey to "go easy on Flynn" in 2017.

Mueller asked the court to "go easy on Flynn" yesterday.

Welp, that looks like Mueller is colluding!

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Flynn faces no jail time for his "substantial assistance" to Mueller.

Breaking on twitter. As soon as I get a link I will post.

It took a full year of stalling for Mueller to say "He's good. Let him go" ???

The other possibility was Mueller intentionally dragged it out in order to keep this mess in the news thru the midterm elections.

Your both wrong. They have no evidence whatsoever on Trump and have been trying all this time to strong arm someone into saying Trump did something against the law, to impeach him before Trump can flush them and the swamp.

Did you forget Trump screaming to everyone how he had been spied on and wiretapped during and after the election? He found that out Ten days after he won, in Trump tower by a person who was a Patriot and worked for the intelligence services.

Mueller, Clinton, Obama, Clapper and Brennan are all guilty of wire tapping then Candidate Trump and this whole investigation has been to get rid of Trump because he knows he was wire tapped before and ten days after the election which is HIGHLY ILLEGAL!!!

They lied to the FISA court using a doctored report from "2007" that had nothing to do with Trump till they inserted his name just so they could spy on him. That's how old the Fusion report truly is.

The Military needs to step in and stop this BS before it gets any worse. You cant have an evil side of the Government going after our President like this. This is whitewater on crack and steroids at the same time. Trump has tried to play nice but this is just down right insane and needs to stop before someone tries to JFK our best leader we have had since him.

a reply to: Xcathdra

wow i love hearing news, i love to learn new info. thank you above top loving your website!!!!!