ClimateSanity
New member
Did you know all of this before today or did you look into your favourite websites to find it?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
What is Flynn guilty of?
- Thread starter ClimateSanity
- Start date
Generally, as I understand it.
ClimateSanity
New member
What's to stop anyone in the administration from asking the intelligence community to unmask their political opponents for political reasons?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Before today, yes. Before this year? No. It's mostly the information I've accumulated from listening to a variety of experts talk about how it works.
ClimateSanity
New member
Well, for one thing, in a lot of cases, they wouldn't be able to tell who their political opponents are because the names are masked.
Or someone else who read the unmasked documents.
ClimateSanity
New member
So, you probably got this information sometime since Trump made his wiretap claim and you got it from the talk shows you listen to?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Well, specifically from people who have worked in the intelligence community and are familiar with the procedures, on a variety of shows.
ClimateSanity
New member
So, the left wing has its propaganda machine fine tuned I see. Once a story on the right makes traction, specialists in the subject are sought with lightning speed to get on a show to snuff out the fire so to speak.
The right is much slower than that.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
The right is much slower than that.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
It helps when basically all the specialists agree with you.
It takes longer to craft the lie that people will believe than to tell the truth. It's that simple. That's why Trump is using the old Nazi tactic of the Big Lie. He recognizes that even when he says something outlandish, his supporters will believe him because of their loyalty. He saves a lot of time not being bothered to come up with something considered believable.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
:freak:
now we gotta wear masks? :sozo2:
:think:
all of us, or just the trump supporters?
dodge
New member
They can take our masks, but they can never take our crypto...
Of course, this site doesn't use any.
You claimed someone was guilty of a felony, I asked for a citation to a specific statute. What you gave me was not a citation to s specific statute. Perhaps you don't know what the term means. Perhaps you just repeat the Fox/Breitbart/Head Cheese Doodle line.
I just wanted to revisit this a little, because there have been a few new developments. When Flynn disclosed that had (probably illegally) been a paid agent of Turkey, there was something that stood out as odd about it. That is, the fact that it was Turkey instead of Russia. I mean, at the time, all the odd illicit contacts between Trump's people and foreign governments seemed to point to Russia. So it was almost refreshing that he was lobbying for a different government. And then this:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/25/michael-flynn-turkey-russia-237550
So...maybe it was Russia all along. It's almost just too tidy.
These people are going to jail, and Flynn will likely be the first. Sure gives some bitter irony to his speech to the RNC convention.
And that brings me to another thought. Flynn is a sworn officer of the United States, under oath to protect and defend the Constitution thereof. He has a 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, but he also has a duty. He has tried to trade his story for immunity with the FBI and Congress, however, saying that he has a story to tell, but it seems to me that if what he has to say bears on the Constitutional order, which it seems nearly certain to do, then he is duty-bound to disclose it rather than hold it as a bargaining chip.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/25/michael-flynn-turkey-russia-237550
So...maybe it was Russia all along. It's almost just too tidy.
These people are going to jail, and Flynn will likely be the first. Sure gives some bitter irony to his speech to the RNC convention.
And that brings me to another thought. Flynn is a sworn officer of the United States, under oath to protect and defend the Constitution thereof. He has a 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, but he also has a duty. He has tried to trade his story for immunity with the FBI and Congress, however, saying that he has a story to tell, but it seems to me that if what he has to say bears on the Constitutional order, which it seems nearly certain to do, then he is duty-bound to disclose it rather than hold it as a bargaining chip.
What is Flynn guilty of?
Flynn is now under investigation by the Senate, the House, the IRS, the Pentagon, the State Department, America's intelligence agencies, .....
That's the definition of a "loose canon," - even by Trump standards!
How ironic that it was Flynn, during the Republican Convention, that took the lead in the chanting of "LOCK HER UP!"
Flynn is now under investigation by the Senate, the House, the IRS, the Pentagon, the State Department, America's intelligence agencies, .....
That's the definition of a "loose canon," - even by Trump standards!
How ironic that it was Flynn, during the Republican Convention, that took the lead in the chanting of "LOCK HER UP!"
Update:
There is a bit of an escalation:
What is Flynn guilty of? How about treason?
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article151149702.html
Of course, treason is very tightly defined by the US Constitution:
The unusual circumstance here is that Turkey is an ally. Can they be construed as an enemy in the context of such a decision? They certainly were a sort of opponent. But if it is treason, and it's at least within the realm of argument that it could be, it can carry the death penalty. But it's at least treason-adjacent. And the reason that matters is that the initial warning from Sally Yates to the Trump administration was that he was vulnerable to blackmail, and the ability of Russia to blackmail Flynn depends, in part, on what they have against him. If they could hold his life itself in the balance, that would potentially be quite persuasive.
There is a bit of an escalation:
What is Flynn guilty of? How about treason?
| Now members of Congress, musing about the tangle of legal difficulties Flynn faces, cite that exchange with Rice as perhaps the most serious: acting on behalf of a foreign nation – from which he had received considerable cash – when making a military decision. Some members of Congress, in private conversations, have even used the word “treason” to describe Flynn’s intervention, though experts doubt that his actions qualify. |
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article151149702.html
Of course, treason is very tightly defined by the US Constitution:
| Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. |
The unusual circumstance here is that Turkey is an ally. Can they be construed as an enemy in the context of such a decision? They certainly were a sort of opponent. But if it is treason, and it's at least within the realm of argument that it could be, it can carry the death penalty. But it's at least treason-adjacent. And the reason that matters is that the initial warning from Sally Yates to the Trump administration was that he was vulnerable to blackmail, and the ability of Russia to blackmail Flynn depends, in part, on what they have against him. If they could hold his life itself in the balance, that would potentially be quite persuasive.