Flynn charged with one count of making false statement

a reply to: Dfairlite

What does that emoji even mean?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: soberbacchus

I'm not sure how many times you have to be told that conspiracy requires an overt action. Pitching a bad/criminal idea is not a crime. Even agreeing to do it is not a crime.

No amount of times will stem the denial. They badly, badly need this.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Sillyolme

The FBI doesnt even believe the trump dossier now.

Why would MUeller?

Do you have a source for that? I read that some parts of it have been verified, while some have not.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Yes he did and he was good to his word.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: soberbacchus

I'm not sure how many times you have to be told that conspiracy requires an overt action. Pitching a bad/criminal idea is not a crime. Even agreeing to do it is not a crime.

This the key here. Just suggesting something is not a crime. There needs to be evidence they were actually going to try this.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Nice try..

Its not a try.. its a fact.

Has Mueller Abandoned The Trump/Russia Collusion Investigation?

Scandal: Just as the FBI and Justice Department is telling Congress that they haven't been able to verify anything of importance in the Trump/Russia collusion dossier, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has decided to cast a much wider net in his fishing expedition. Is this a coincidence? Or is it a sign that Mueller also realizes there's no there there?

Shortly after it came to light that the Clinton campaign and the DNC had secretly paid Fusion GPS to assemble the so-called Steele Dossier, which Fusion then tried to fob off on reporters before the election, the press dismissed this bombshell by saying that the source of its financing was irrelevant because much of the dossier "checks out" or has been "proven to be accurate."

But according to the Washington Examiner's Byron York, FBI and Justice officials recently told congressional investigators that after spending nearly a year and a half looking into it, "they have not been able to verify or corroborate the substantive allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign outlined in the Trump dossier."

In other words, they've failed to verify things like: the alleged meetings of Carter Page with the head of Russia's state-owned oil company and a top official in the Putin government; the alleged meeting between Michael Cohen and "Kremlin representatives"; or any of the other specific claims in the dossier that weren't already public knowledge when it was written.

Mueller's initial indictments suggested that he's had no better luck than the FBI.

FBI has not verified Trump dossier

FBI and Justice Department officials have told congressional investigators in recent days that they have not been able to verify or corroborate the substantive allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign outlined in the Trump dossier.

The FBI received the first installment of the dossier in July 2016. It received later installments as they were written at the height of the presidential campaign, which means the bureau has had more than a year to investigate the allegations in the document. The dossier was financed by the Hillary Clinton campaign and compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele.

An August 24, 2017 subpoena from the House Intelligence Committee to the FBI and Justice Department asked for information on the bureau's efforts to validate the dossier. Specifically, the subpoena demanded "any documents, if they exist, that memorialize DOJ and/or FBI efforts to corroborate, validate, or evaluate information provided by Mr. Steele and/or sub-sources and/or contained in the 'Trump Dossier.'"

According to sources familiar with the matter, neither the FBI nor the Justice Department has provided documents in response to that part of the committee's subpoena. But in face-to-face briefings with congressional staff, according to those sources, FBI and DOJ officials have said they cannot verify the dossier's charges of a conspiracy between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.

The news appears to contradict recent statements from some top Democrats. "A lot of it has turned out to be true," Rep. Adam Schiff, ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence panel, told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday.

the dossiers now come with warranty disclaimers that its not verified and cannot be verified.

If it wasnt for those pesky facts and their dog Red herring would have gotten away with it...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Dfairlite

Also worth noting what Flynn is giving them for this sweetheart deal.

This just in. He gave them Kushner...

OK, we know that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, but several of us have pointed out that the contact with the Russian ambassador is not illegal, or even unethical. Kusher is only in trouble if he lied under oath about it.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Just breaking...Kushner implicated in Flynns testimony today.


🎶higher and higher baby. It's a living thing...🎶

Yep.

Kushner was the one directing Flynn on the Russian Conversations.
At a minimum it puts Kushner of the hook for the (1) Logan Act (Weak Charge), never prosecuted thus far and (2) Lying to congress repeatedly in testimony. I'd have to see if he gave off-the-record testimony which usually includes a Federal Agent with a threat of Perjury, but lying to congress in testimony is no small charge either.

Since Mueller hasn't charged Kushner yet, he is likely deciding what can be included in that basket of charges.

On another note, Trump would Pardon Kushner in a heartbeat.
Which might explain why they have been digging into Kushner's banking and business dealings.
Those would State of NY and NJ charges, not Federal and not able to be Pardoned.

Mueller is lining up his ducks

a reply to: soberbacchus

They've been digging into everyone's banking and business dealings. Remember the long thread gloating over how they were digging into Trump's going way way back?

a reply to: soberbacchus

As part of the transition team the Logan act does not apply.

It is not illegal to speak to the Russians or meet with them over foreign policy issues.


Not sure why the left cant seem to understand that point.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Nice try..

Its not a try.. its a fact.

Anonymous sources and the Washington Examiner do not qualify as "facts". Not even close.

Fox is reporting KT McFarland was the transition official who directed Flynn on Russia.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

As part of the transition team the Logan act does not apply.

It is not illegal to speak to the Russians or meet with them over foreign policy issues.

????

You just make stuff up. Its wild. Have you figured out Flynn was not indicted but rather charged yet?

And yes, it is Illegal for a transition team to conduct foreign policy when they are not in office.

Asking the Russians to delay a UN vote or assuring them that Sanctions would be reversed and telling them not to react is absolutely conducting foreign policy and undermining the United States Government.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Nice try..

Its not a try.. its a fact.

Anonymous sources and the Washington Examiner do not qualify as "facts". Not even close.

Actually they do but whatever works in denial land for you and the others.

Why would the FBI and DOJ inform Congress committees of such facts? Why is it Democrats on the Intel committees keep stating there is no evidence of trump Russia collusion?

Why did the person who put the dossier together unable to confirm / corroborate the claims made in it?
Why was he upset the dossier was released in its entirety if its true?

Ignoring the truth doesnt substantiate the dossier.

a reply to: soberbacchus

and yet Flynn was not charged with violating the Logan act?

Maybe you should ask why.. While your at it research the obama admin, the bush admin, the clinton admin, the bush admin, the Reagan admin etc etc and you will see the same thing. Especially for the REagan administration with regards to the US hostages in Iran.

So no, unlike some im not making anything up. i am using facts that people ignore because it doesnt support their claims. But by all means use a law that was enacted in 1799.

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 744; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(K), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Dfairlite

Also worth noting what Flynn is giving them for this sweetheart deal.

This just in. He gave them Kushner...

OK, we know that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, but several of us have pointed out that the contact with the Russian ambassador is not illegal, or even unethical. Kusher is only in trouble if he lied under oath about it.

Contact? No not illegal.
Conducting US Foreign Policy? Promises to lift US Sanctions? Delaying UN votes?
Kushner might go down as the first person to have egregiously violated the Logan Act to Warrant charges.

Hell, Nancy Pelosi visited Syria a while back and the GOP demanded she be charged in violation of the Logan Act. For visiting Syria. Kushner was undermining a sitting President of the United States promising Russians the lifting of sanctions and asking them to delay UN votes.

And yes, if he testified under oath he is on the hook for a federal perjury charge.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

and yet Flynn was not charged with violating the Logan act?

He was not charged for a lot of things. He is a cooperating witness.


Apart from that, his defense is/was that he was doing it at the behest and direction of a senior campaign official.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

As part of the transition team the Logan act does not apply.

It is not illegal to speak to the Russians or meet with them over foreign policy issues.

????

You just make stuff up. Its wild. Have you figured out Flynn was not indicted but rather charged yet?

And yes, it is Illegal for a transition team to conduct foreign policy when they are not in office.

Asking the Russians to delay a UN vote or assuring them that Sanctions would be reversed and telling them not to react is absolutely conducting foreign policy and undermining the United States Government.

That's based on a law from 1799. Only twice in 218 years has anyone ever tried to enforce it, and both times they failed. It would be the ultimate Hail Mary pass if Mueller tried to indict anyone on it.

Imagine if Obama would have done this. All the conservatives on ATS would be calling for his impeachment but because Trump is a "Republican" You defend this.

I asked a few of you on several threads of you would hold a republican president to the same standards as you do Obama, before this last election, and many of you said yes. As Maury would say..."...and the lie detector determined THAT was a lie."

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

and yet Flynn was not charged with violating the Logan act?

He was not charged for a lot of things. He is a cooperating witness.


Apart from that, his defense is/was that he was doing it at the behest and direction of a senior campaign official.

Yes and again its not illegal top speak to people from foreign governments or discuss policy with an incoming administration. However, you seem confused by the fact Flynn was charged under 18 USC 1001 for lying to the FBI.

Asking him to meet with those officials is not illegal. What they discussed was not illegal.
Lying to the FBI about the meetings are and it is what he was charged with.

From 2 incidents back in 2016, before Trump was president.