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

originally posted by: Christosterone
I am a Texan.

Hillary was a terrible candidate.

I voted for Donald trump.

My reason for doing so hinged not upon anything Russian.

The sole reason I voted for him was he did not illegally have a server in his basement while serving as Secetary of State.

Furthermore my father, a lifelong yellow dog Democrat, did not vote for Hillary because she was/is a terrible person.

I've been looking, but I still can't find how this is relevant to the OP or the topic.

"Fake news!"

"But Obama!"

"But Hillary!"

Give it a rest lol.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Wait for the flood of elementary school drop outs with crushes on trump to rationalize some angle to this news.

In the mean time, we should all be starring and flagging this up to the top.


time ATS does what ATS does best: question all authority. Not just the left nor right. But all. That's how I was brought into the fold of this site, came back after an 8 year break. It was a joke from its former self. A group of mudslingers with no intention other than to beat their opposition and pester any dissent with child like taunts and illogical, useless rhetoric.

a reply to: Gryphon66

according to officials with knowledge of the matter

fake news tracks ...

a reply to: chaeone86

Just asked why there were "no takers". Pretty short but important part of the op.

originally posted by: Christosterone
I am a Texan.

Hillary was a terrible candidate.

I voted for Donald trump.

My reason for doing so hinged not upon anything Russian.

I am from Missouri.
Hillary was a horrible candidate, as was Trump.
I didn't vote for either, because they are both idiots, had nothing to do with the Russians.
As a veteran, if Trump was somehow in collusion with the Russians, and they did anything to affect the election, and Trump's team is involved, they are traitors, and deserve the penalties outlined for that particular sort of criminals.

I am not a butthurt democrat, but I don't trust him any farther than I can throw him.

a reply to: xuenchen

It would be reckless to publish such words without credible sources. If it were not true, it would end the career of a staff writer overnight.

Are you just weak of mind? Do you not think there was a lot of questions fielded by the writer, editor, management and directors of this news organization before such a major story like this would be released?

When will you open your eyes to the big picture and join all fellows who question power rather than parroting the agenda of one side.

Everyone on ATS knows all political parties and their representatives are fairly corrupt. You need to see the forest for the trees, friend.

a reply to: muse7

That is what I can gather from it, but now is a bigger issue behind this, some of the intelligence gathering was done under fishy means at one point.

The hearings are going to expose more than just the Russia link to hacking our elections, this whole thing will open a can or worm that the Obama administration was trying to kept behind the scenes when he was told by Comey that he knew back in June about Russia trying to hack elections.

originally posted by: Christosterone
I am a Texan.

Hillary was a terrible candidate.

I voted for Donald trump.

My reason for doing so hinged not upon anything Russian.

What does you voting for Trump, have to do with Mike Flynn offering to testify in exchange for immunity?

The first conspirator to crack always gets the best deal from the prosecution.

a reply to: chaeone86

You assume everything MSM is logic ?

uuuuuuuHaHa

Immunity would be the first thing you would want before you testified about anything. It doesn't necessarily mean that he has any thing to say. The story itself presents pure conjecture that he was even speaking to Russia about lifting sanctions. As far as I know that hasn't been proven. It says that no one is taking him up on his offer I wonder if that's because they are not interested in bringing him into a trial. Is this just another fake story? Are they even interested in examining him under oath? Or are they just making this up out of thin air?




a reply to: Gryphon66

a reply to: Idreamofme

Because high treason isn't something anything a conscionable lawyer or prosecutor would ever, ever grant immunity for.


And for the obvious fact they already have enough they don't need Flynn.

I worry for the chaos that may ensue once findings are made public, because I love my country, I love my fellows on both sides of the aisle, but the degree of cognitive dissonance has become so high. Friends with differing views cannot even agree on the facts. Which makes debate useless.

Guess we just gotta pray folks.

I'll believe it when I see it.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: muse7

That is what I can gather from it, but now is a bigger issue behind this, some of the intelligence gathering was done under fishy means at one point.

The hearings are going to expose more than just the Russia link to hacking our elections, this whole thing will open a can or worm that the Obama administration was trying to kept behind the scenes when he was told by Comey that he knew back in June about Russia trying to hack elections.

I am pretty sure that all foreign agents in this country are monitored, apparently more than a few Trump associates were found having conversations with them. I never worked in military or civilian intelligence, but pretty sure that is how that works.

a reply to: Woodcarver

I don't think is fake, but he is a Democrat, perhaps the intelligence committee think that what he have to say is of not important or perhaps too damaging to the wrong side.

Then again his credibility will be put on the burner as a Democrat.

a reply to: Woodcarver

Innocent people don't ask for immunity.

Especially not high functioning government officials. He's not some teenager try to get out of a petty drug crime by snitching on the classmate who sold to him.

originally posted by: TheOneElectric
Listen closely. No one asks for immunity exchanges if there is no crime. It does not happen.

Maybe. It's possible that Flynn knows he's in trouble, so he's going to testify about something that doesn't exist in exchange for immunity against his crimes. It would be a longshot legally, but worth doing if there's no justifiable defense he can go to court with.

I don't think that's likely, but it's worth keeping in mind.

a reply to: chaeone86

Know of an innocent politician? They would ask for immunity even if the punishment was losing the nicest parking space.

a reply to: BubbaJoe

Is common sense to keep tags on foreign governments is nothing wrong with that.

BTW, my husband used to work for Intel, no gathering occurs.

All he said is that US have some very nice toys.

originally posted by: Jiggly
"according to officials with knowledge of the matter"

mmmmk

The Wall Street Journal has some FAKE NEWS reporters and contributors, just like the NYTimes.