Justice Dept. Drops Case Against Michael Flynn

7 hours ago, Lucylu71 said:

I'm sorry you choose not to read the various sources I've provided for you.  I'm sure many of your questions would be answered.

What we have here, is a classic case of Trumpster Whinorrhea.

On 5/17/2020 at 8:06 AM, Lucylu71 said:

He did speak with him.  So what?  Even the WaPo was divided if it was a news story worth printing.

Correct. 

In light of the answer to the previous question, this one is not applicable. 

I know the Fox news story on the interview with the WaPo reporter who discussed their coverage of the story left this part out, by accident I'm sure, but if you read the transcript of the interview they're referring to you'll find that what they were 'divided' about was that they only knew the calls had taken place, they didn't know the content of the calls, and they couldn't determine if the calls were benign; just a cordial introduction prior to taking office, or more scandalous, with the specific example being if they had discussed the newly imposed sanctions.  Of course we now know they had discussed the sanctions.

Both the NSA and FBI define a "compromised" person as someone who a foreign power has information on that could, for instance, get them fired.  We don't have to wonder if the Russian's knowledge that Flynn had lied about the Kislyak meant they had information that could get him fired, since it did indeed get him fired.

On 5/17/2020 at 8:21 AM, Lucylu71 said:

Yes, the unmasking requests were unusual.  Biden's a few days before he leaves office for example.  And, he denies knowing anything about an investigation.  Clapper diesnt know why he himself requested it.

If youre still claiming the Steele dossier is a legitimate basis for anything, except maybe into the DNC part in it, then there isnt much more to discuss. 

Some more good reading on Biden's part.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/497711-the-unmasking-of-joe-biden

 

The unmasking request occurred a week and a half after the call that triggered the report in question.  I would agree it would seem unusual if the request was a year or two after the report, but this isn't an unusual timeframe for such a request to occur.

You're free to offer what in the Steele Dossier has been disproven.  It's main claims were that Russia was behind the DNC server hack (multiple US intelligence agencies have come to this conclusion) and that people associated with the Trump campaign were aware of Russia's involvement (a Trump staffer admitted this to a foreign diplomat).  It also centered on Page, who the report claimed had travelled to Russia in the beginning of July (he did) and had met with Sechin and Diveykin (he admitted to this under oath).

Mainly, I'm not sure how I'm supposed get worked up about Biden making an unmasking request as a supposed attack on a political opponent when that information came about due to declassifying and leaking to the press the list of unmasking requests, as a fairly obvious attack on a political opponent.

And this is all in the context of what now defines what rises to the level of justifying an investigation into political dirty tricks.  Trump illegally withheld funds, funds meant to protect our interests and national security, to leverage a personal political favor, the resulting investigation that was then defined as a "hoax" by Trump and his supporters.  If that's not a big deal then why would this be?

"A three-judge panel on the Washington, DC, Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the federal judge overseeing the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn to dismiss the prosecution on Wednesday.

In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court also overturned US District Judge Emmet Sullivan's decision to bring in a retired federal judge and veteran prosecutor to argue against the Justice Department's motion to dismiss Flynn's case. Sullivan had scheduled a July 16 hearing date to weigh whether or not to toss out the case against Flynn."

https://www.businessinsider.com/appeals-court-orders-judge-dismiss-doj-case-michael-flynn-2020-6

On 6/24/2020 at 7:50 AM, Lucylu71 said:

"A three-judge panel on the Washington, DC, Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the federal judge overseeing the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn to dismiss the prosecution on Wednesday.

 

In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court also overturned US District Judge Emmet Sullivan's decision to bring in a retired federal judge and veteran prosecutor to argue against the Justice Department's motion to dismiss Flynn's case. Sullivan had scheduled a July 16 hearing date to weigh whether or not to toss out the case against Flynn."

https://www.businessinsider.com/appeals-court-orders-judge-dismiss-doj-case-michael-flynn-2020-6

 

 

If you're celebrating this as a win for corrupt authoritarianism that I can't argue that, I don't agree that's a good thing but at least you understand what this represents.  I do find however that often people buy into how corrupt authoritarians try to sell their misdeeds; that their corrupt acts are actually examples of patriotism and freedom, even though they're the opposite.

Michael Flynn wasn't just some random person working for our enemy and lying about it, he wasn't even just a member of the administration, other than maybe the President, he was in the position most critical to being free of entanglements with our enemies, he was the National Security Advisor.  He was an unregistered foreign agent of Russia, and lied about it, repeatedly.  

What should the repercussions for these violations of our trust and national security be?

1 hour ago, MunoRN said:

If you're celebrating this as a win for corrupt authoritarianism that I can't argue that, I don't agree that's a good thing but at least you understand what this represents.  I do find however that often people buy into how corrupt authoritarians try to sell their misdeeds; that their corrupt acts are actually examples of patriotism and freedom, even though they're the opposite.

Michael Flynn wasn't just some random person working for our enemy and lying about it, he wasn't even just a member of the administration, other than maybe the President, he was in the position most critical to being free of entanglements with our enemies, he was the National Security Advisor.  He was an unregistered foreign agent of Russia, and lied about it, repeatedly.  

What should the repercussions for these violations of our trust and national security be?

I dont know what the repercussions should be, but a corrupt prosecutorial process is not the answer.

4 hours ago, MunoRN said:

If you're celebrating this as a win for corrupt authoritarianism that I can't argue that, I don't agree that's a good thing but at least you understand what this represents.  I do find however that often people buy into how corrupt authoritarians try to sell their misdeeds; that their corrupt acts are actually examples of patriotism and freedom, even though they're the opposite.

Michael Flynn wasn't just some random person working for our enemy and lying about it, he wasn't even just a member of the administration, other than maybe the President, he was in the position most critical to being free of entanglements with our enemies, he was the National Security Advisor.  He was an unregistered foreign agent of Russia, and lied about it, repeatedly.  

What should the repercussions for these violations of our trust and national security be?

It is truly a sad day when the corrupt are allowed to walk free.

No American should celebrate when the corrupt or guilty are allowed to walk free.

"Former Vice President Joe Biden appears to have “personally raised the idea” of investigating Michael Flynn for potentially having violated the obscure Logan Act during his phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, according to newly filed court papers Wednesday.

The previously sealed document also says that former President Barack Obama told top members of his administration that “the right people” should investigate Flynn."

https://nypost.com/2020/06/24/biden-may-have-personally-raised-idea-to-investigate-flynn/

4 hours ago, Lucylu71 said:

"Former Vice President Joe Biden appears to have “personally raised the idea” of investigating Michael Flynn for potentially having violated the obscure Logan Act during his phone calls with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, according to newly filed court papers Wednesday.

The previously sealed document also says that former President Barack Obama told top members of his administration that “the right people” should investigate Flynn."

https://nypost.com/2020/06/24/biden-may-have-personally-raised-idea-to-investigate-flynn/

 

This is funny as all get out.  Does this mean that the Trump supporters are going to start chanting LOCK HIM UP again? I think that reflects well on the job that Barr is doing for his client, Trump. Who be waiting for the DOJ to announce their investigationinto Biden. 

Bwahahaha 

37 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

This is funny as all get out.  Does this mean that the Trump supporters are going to start chanting LOCK HIM UP again? I think that reflects well on the job that Barr is doing for his client, Trump. Who be waiting for the DOJ to announce their investigationinto Biden. 

Bwahahaha 

 

As I have already stated, I am waiting for Biden administration to launch investigation of Barr.

The hands of time, are tick tocking down on Trump.

Nothing like trying to kick folks off insurance during a pandemic.

Yep. That's a sure way to win reelection!

Hurry up, November 3rd!!!!!!

42 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

This is funny as all get out.  Does this mean that the Trump supporters are going to start chanting LOCK HIM UP again? I think that reflects well on the job that Barr is doing for his client, Trump. Who be waiting for the DOJ to announce their investigationinto Biden. 

Bwahahaha 

 

Makes me long for the days when Jeff Sessions was AG.

He at least seemed to understand that his job was working for the country; not Trump.

Billy Barr seems to be under the impression that he works solely for a criminal: Donald John Trump.

Edited Jun 26 by Lil Nel

On 6/25/2020 at 3:17 PM, Lucylu71 said:

I dont know what the repercussions should be, but a corrupt prosecutorial process is not the answer.

I know that at this point you're well aware that prosecuting Flynn for being a National security threat was not corrupt.  If you disagree, feel free to support that claim.