Demon
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,854
I'm under the impression that Barr doesn't have a part in this. But I could be wrong...
The DOJ is Dropping the Case Against Mike Flynn
- Thread starter AGBF
- Start date
I'm under the impression that Barr doesn't have a part in this. But I could be wrong...
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 7,329
Good for Sidney Powell to speak up to Barack Obama.
Open Memorandum to Barack Obama | Sidney Powell
OPEN MEMORANDUM To: Barack Hussein Obama From: Sidney Powell www.SidneyPowell.com Date: May 13, 2020 Re: Your Failure to Find Precedent for Flynn Dismissal Regarding the decision of the Department of Justice to dismiss charges against General Flynn, in your recent call with your alumni, you...
sidneypowell.com
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,166
Good for Sidney Powell to speak up to Barack Obama.
Open Memorandum to Barack Obama | Sidney Powell
OPEN MEMORANDUM To: Barack Hussein Obama From: Sidney Powell www.SidneyPowell.com Date: May 13, 2020 Re: Your Failure to Find Precedent for Flynn Dismissal Regarding the decision of the Department of Justice to dismiss charges against General Flynn, in your recent call with your alumni, you...sidneypowell.com
I found this very unimpressive.It appears to me that the author simply scrounged around for what he could and published a list. There is no compelling argument in his article. And what's the big deal in "speaking up" to Barack Obama? Barack Obama doesn' threaten anyone the way Donald Trump threatens everyone with tweets and being primaried. Anyone can speak up to him with impunity. I also noted that Sidney Powell made sure to use President Obama's middle name. We wouldn't want anyone to miss the fact it is "Hussein".
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 7,329
He is a she and she is Flynn's lawyer.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 4,814
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 7,329
Gotta love the Babylon Bee
babylonbee.com
Comey: 'We Did Not Spy---We Just Observed And Reported Secretly Without The Subject's Knowledge Or Consent'
WASHINGTON, D.C.—After Attorney General Barr suggested that the FBI and other agencies spied on Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, former FBI director James Comey fired back.
babylonbee.com
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 7,329
Why the hell is Joe Biden asking for unmasking of Flynn in January 2017?
www.foxnews.com
Read: Documents listing names of Obama-era officials who sought to 'unmask' Michael Flynn
GOP Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Sen. Chuck of Iowa released documents on Wednesday listing the declassified names of Obama-era officials who sought to “unmask” former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Read the documents here.
www.foxnews.com
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,166
"WASHINGTON — The federal judge overseeing the criminal case of President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn appointed an outsider on Wednesday to argue against the Justice Department in its effort to drop the case and investigate whether Mr. Flynn committed perjury, an extraordinary move in a case with acute political overtones.
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia said in a brief order that he had appointed John Gleeson, a retired judge, 'to present arguments in opposition to' the department’s request to withdraw the charge against Mr. Flynn, who had pleaded guilty to lying to investigators as part of a larger inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
Judge Sullivan also asked Judge Gleeson to address whether the court should explore the possibility that Mr. Flynn opened himself up to perjury charges by pleading guilty under oath to a felony charge of making false statements to federal authorities. Mr. Flynn entered guilty pleas twice in front of two judges but later sought to withdraw his plea.
The judge’s order is the latest astonishing move in the latest high-profile criminal case to prompt accusations from current and former law enforcement officials that Attorney General William P. Barr has politicized the Justice Department to protect allies of President Trump. The Justice Department declined to comment. Last week, the department abruptly moved to withdraw its charge against Mr. Flynn.
Judge Gleeson, who served on the bench at the United States District Court in Brooklyn, wrote an op-ed article this week in The Washington Post encouraging Judge Sullivan to scrutinize the motion.
'Prosecutors deserve a "presumption of regularity" — the benefit of the doubt that they are acting honestly and following the rules,' he wrote along with other former law enforcement officials. 'But when the facts suggest they have abused their power, that presumption fades'.”
www.nytimes.com
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia said in a brief order that he had appointed John Gleeson, a retired judge, 'to present arguments in opposition to' the department’s request to withdraw the charge against Mr. Flynn, who had pleaded guilty to lying to investigators as part of a larger inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
Judge Sullivan also asked Judge Gleeson to address whether the court should explore the possibility that Mr. Flynn opened himself up to perjury charges by pleading guilty under oath to a felony charge of making false statements to federal authorities. Mr. Flynn entered guilty pleas twice in front of two judges but later sought to withdraw his plea.
The judge’s order is the latest astonishing move in the latest high-profile criminal case to prompt accusations from current and former law enforcement officials that Attorney General William P. Barr has politicized the Justice Department to protect allies of President Trump. The Justice Department declined to comment. Last week, the department abruptly moved to withdraw its charge against Mr. Flynn.
Judge Gleeson, who served on the bench at the United States District Court in Brooklyn, wrote an op-ed article this week in The Washington Post encouraging Judge Sullivan to scrutinize the motion.
'Prosecutors deserve a "presumption of regularity" — the benefit of the doubt that they are acting honestly and following the rules,' he wrote along with other former law enforcement officials. 'But when the facts suggest they have abused their power, that presumption fades'.”
Judge Appoints Outsider to Take On Justice Dept. in Flynn Case (Published 2020)
A retired judge will also examine whether the former national security adviser committed perjury.
Demon
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,854
"WASHINGTON — The federal judge overseeing the criminal case of President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn appointed an outsider on Wednesday to argue against the Justice Department in its effort to drop the case and investigate whether Mr. Flynn committed perjury, an extraordinary move in a case with acute political overtones.
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia said in a brief order that he had appointed John Gleeson, a retired judge, 'to present arguments in opposition to' the department’s request to withdraw the charge against Mr. Flynn, who had pleaded guilty to lying to investigators as part of a larger inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
Judge Sullivan also asked Judge Gleeson to address whether the court should explore the possibility that Mr. Flynn opened himself up to perjury charges by pleading guilty under oath to a felony charge of making false statements to federal authorities. Mr. Flynn entered guilty pleas twice in front of two judges but later sought to withdraw his plea.
The judge’s order is the latest astonishing move in the latest high-profile criminal case to prompt accusations from current and former law enforcement officials that Attorney General William P. Barr has politicized the Justice Department to protect allies of President Trump. The Justice Department declined to comment. Last week, the department abruptly moved to withdraw its charge against Mr. Flynn.
Judge Gleeson, who served on the bench at the United States District Court in Brooklyn, wrote an op-ed article this week in The Washington Post encouraging Judge Sullivan to scrutinize the motion.
'Prosecutors deserve a "presumption of regularity" — the benefit of the doubt that they are acting honestly and following the rules,' he wrote along with other former law enforcement officials. 'But when the facts suggest they have abused their power, that presumption fades'.”
Judge Appoints Outsider to Take On Justice Dept. in Flynn Case (Published 2020)
A retired judge will also examine whether the former national security adviser committed perjury.
Just a side note - Gleeson is the person who send John Gotti to jail, and brought down the Gambino family.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 4,814
"WASHINGTON — The federal judge overseeing the criminal case of President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn appointed an outsider on Wednesday to argue against the Justice Department in its effort to drop the case and investigate whether Mr. Flynn committed perjury, an extraordinary move in a case with acute political overtones.
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia said in a brief order that he had appointed John Gleeson, a retired judge, 'to present arguments in opposition to' the department’s request to withdraw the charge against Mr. Flynn, who had pleaded guilty to lying to investigators as part of a larger inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
Judge Sullivan also asked Judge Gleeson to address whether the court should explore the possibility that Mr. Flynn opened himself up to perjury charges by pleading guilty under oath to a felony charge of making false statements to federal authorities. Mr. Flynn entered guilty pleas twice in front of two judges but later sought to withdraw his plea.
The judge’s order is the latest astonishing move in the latest high-profile criminal case to prompt accusations from current and former law enforcement officials that Attorney General William P. Barr has politicized the Justice Department to protect allies of President Trump. The Justice Department declined to comment. Last week, the department abruptly moved to withdraw its charge against Mr. Flynn.
Judge Gleeson, who served on the bench at the United States District Court in Brooklyn, wrote an op-ed article this week in The Washington Post encouraging Judge Sullivan to scrutinize the motion.
'Prosecutors deserve a "presumption of regularity" — the benefit of the doubt that they are acting honestly and following the rules,' he wrote along with other former law enforcement officials. 'But when the facts suggest they have abused their power, that presumption fades'.”
Judge Appoints Outsider to Take On Justice Dept. in Flynn Case (Published 2020)
A retired judge will also examine whether the former national security adviser committed perjury.
How dare you derail their derail of the COVID-19 crisis??
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,166
Another piece of news.
"WASHINGTON — A key former F.B.I. official cast doubt on the Justice Department’s case for dropping a criminal charge against President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn during an interview with investigators last week, according to people familiar with the investigation.
Department officials reviewing the Flynn case interviewed Bill Priestap, the former head of F.B.I. counterintelligence, two days before making their extraordinary request to drop the case to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. They did not tell Judge Sullivan about Mr. Priestap’s interview. A Justice Department official said that they were in the process of writing up a report on the interview and that it would soon be filed with the court.
The department’s motion referred to notes that Mr. Priestap wrote around the bureau’s 2017 questioning of Mr. Flynn, who later pleaded guilty to lying to investigators during that interview. His lawyers said Mr. Priestap’s notes — recently uncovered during a review of the case — suggested that the F.B.I. was trying to entrap Mr. Flynn, and Attorney General William P. Barr said investigators were trying to 'lay a perjury trap.'
That interpretation was wrong, Mr. Priestap told the prosecutors reviewing the case. He said that F.B.I. officials were trying to do the right thing in questioning Mr. Flynn and that he knew of no effort to set him up. Media reports about his notes misconstrued them, he said, according to the people familiar with the investigation.
The department’s decision to exclude mention of Mr. Priestap’s interview in the motion could trouble Judge Sullivan, who signaled late on Tuesday that he was skeptical of the department’s arguments.
Mr. Priestap and the Justice Department declined to comment. Mr. Priestap told investigators that he did not remember the circumstances surrounding the notes that he took, and that he was giving them his interpretation of the notes as he read them now, according to a person familiar with his interview".
www.nytimes.com
"WASHINGTON — A key former F.B.I. official cast doubt on the Justice Department’s case for dropping a criminal charge against President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn during an interview with investigators last week, according to people familiar with the investigation.
Department officials reviewing the Flynn case interviewed Bill Priestap, the former head of F.B.I. counterintelligence, two days before making their extraordinary request to drop the case to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. They did not tell Judge Sullivan about Mr. Priestap’s interview. A Justice Department official said that they were in the process of writing up a report on the interview and that it would soon be filed with the court.
The department’s motion referred to notes that Mr. Priestap wrote around the bureau’s 2017 questioning of Mr. Flynn, who later pleaded guilty to lying to investigators during that interview. His lawyers said Mr. Priestap’s notes — recently uncovered during a review of the case — suggested that the F.B.I. was trying to entrap Mr. Flynn, and Attorney General William P. Barr said investigators were trying to 'lay a perjury trap.'
That interpretation was wrong, Mr. Priestap told the prosecutors reviewing the case. He said that F.B.I. officials were trying to do the right thing in questioning Mr. Flynn and that he knew of no effort to set him up. Media reports about his notes misconstrued them, he said, according to the people familiar with the investigation.
The department’s decision to exclude mention of Mr. Priestap’s interview in the motion could trouble Judge Sullivan, who signaled late on Tuesday that he was skeptical of the department’s arguments.
Mr. Priestap and the Justice Department declined to comment. Mr. Priestap told investigators that he did not remember the circumstances surrounding the notes that he took, and that he was giving them his interpretation of the notes as he read them now, according to a person familiar with his interview".
Ex-F.B.I. Official Is Said to Undercut Justice Dept. Effort to Drop Flynn Case (Published 2020)
Prosecutors questioned a former F.B.I. official whose notes were used to buttress their motion to dismiss the charge against the president’s first national security adviser.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
Not only Biden but 16 other person from the Obama admin? . He was being set up right from the start.Why the hell is Joe Biden asking for unmasking of Flynn in January 2017?
Read: Documents listing names of Obama-era officials who sought to 'unmask' Michael Flynn
GOP Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Sen. Chuck of Iowa released documents on Wednesday listing the declassified names of Obama-era officials who sought to “unmask” former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Read the documents here.
S
smitcompton
Guest
Hi,
Lets remember a few things. Gen Flynn is a lawyer. He knows he ain't supposed lie to the FBI. Put that aside for a moment. Gen Flynn's co-operation was contingent on his son not being prosecuted. He obviously thought that maybe Trump and Ass had done something wrong so he pleaded guilty to save his son.(and of course himself.). As soon as the Mueller report came out and people realized no criminal charges were placed on Trump and Ass. he pled guilty for no reason. They wouldn't have done anything to him had he told the truth. As I said before not material to the investigation.
He was not set-up. Yes they do have him in a bind now. Either he lied now in court about the guilty plea, or he lied to the FBI. He has done both. He co-operated to protect his son. He has given good service to this country. All his failings are very human. I still say, Let him go. For myself Justice is served.
Annette
Lets remember a few things. Gen Flynn is a lawyer. He knows he ain't supposed lie to the FBI. Put that aside for a moment. Gen Flynn's co-operation was contingent on his son not being prosecuted. He obviously thought that maybe Trump and Ass had done something wrong so he pleaded guilty to save his son.(and of course himself.). As soon as the Mueller report came out and people realized no criminal charges were placed on Trump and Ass. he pled guilty for no reason. They wouldn't have done anything to him had he told the truth. As I said before not material to the investigation.
He was not set-up. Yes they do have him in a bind now. Either he lied now in court about the guilty plea, or he lied to the FBI. He has done both. He co-operated to protect his son. He has given good service to this country. All his failings are very human. I still say, Let him go. For myself Justice is served.
Annette
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
Hi, are you saying that since no criminal charges were brought against Trump that Flynn's lying has no bearing anymore? Or because he was heroic and took the fall for his son he should be not prosecuted?
I am not for or against at this point.. Just trying to understand your reasons
thanks!
I am not for or against at this point.. Just trying to understand your reasons
thanks!
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
Thank you Annette! that's my GRANDdaughter, she is so sweet and wild 
thank you for the reply and as granny to this sweet one I appreciate your taking the time!
Peace
thank you for the reply and as granny to this sweet one I appreciate your taking the time!Peace
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
@smitcompton and others what do you make of all these lawyers etc who were upset with this situation? you can see what administration(s) these people were employed under btw.. some go back to Reagan..Just wonderful what people think about this.
@AGBF your take?
medium.com
Nice day in Texas if ya'll like HOT. (obviously I don't but I'm here anyway!).
@AGBF your take?
DOJ Alumni Statement on Flynn Case
We, the undersigned, are alumni of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) who have collectively served both Republican and…
Nice day in Texas if ya'll like HOT.
(obviously I don't but I'm here anyway!).
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
Yes she is!..Thank you Annette! that's my GRANDdaughter, she is so sweet and wild
She looks like a conservative to me.... Tell her not to believe anything granny say about politics..
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
Deb, I guess you feel the same about this case? Was Obama wrong to pardon Gen. James Cartwright ?
Obama pardons James Cartwright in leak case
Cartwright pleaded guilty in October to one felony count of making false statements to the FBI.
thehill.com
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
yeah he was.
www.nytimes.com
Obama Pardons James Cartwright, General Who Lied to F.B.I. in Leak Case (Published 2017)
The move saves General Cartwright, a retired Marine officer, from a possible prison sentence for lying about discussing Iran’s nuclear program with reporters.
Deb, I guess you feel the same about this case? Was Obama wrong to pardon Gen. James Cartwright ?
Obama pardons James Cartwright in leak case
Cartwright pleaded guilty in October to one felony count of making false statements to the FBI.
S
smitcompton
Guest
Hi,
The case against General Petraeus began differently than Gen. Flynn. Gen Petraeus was head of the CIA at the time. Someone reported that his girlfriend was stalking and harassing a friend of his. The FBI was called in and when Petraeus was asked if he provided his girlfriend, who was writing his autobiography, any access to top secret information, he denied it. He denied having an affair or giving her his notebooks , which included top secret information. He was charged with a crime and many wanted him to get jailtime. He made a deal with, wait for it, Robert Mueller, who was head of the FBI at the time. No jail time--2 yrs probation and 40,000 fine. He resigned but has been asked for his advise through the yrs.
The DOJ says that at the time Flynn was questioned there was no basis for an investigation at that time. So, no matter what Flynn said he shouldn't have been questioned and thus his answers are irrelevant. The DOJ drops cases all the time Defendants plead guilty and can change their plea to not guilty at any time. The judge has not sentenced here, and if the DOJ wants the case dismissed, I don't see that as a miscarriage of justice. I gave my own personal reasons in my above posts. Yes, I think this is political, but Gen Flynn didn't do anything criminal. What is he being punished for? The was nothing significant in what he said. I don't care that this move has invoked 1000 prosecutors to say the Justice system is ruined... Courts dismiss cases every day.
Politically Trump doesn't want to pardon. He wants innocent, so he can claim he was also innocent. Pardons you have to accept guilt as part of the pardon.
Thats the best I have.
The incident with Gen Flynn happened 4 days after the inauguration. What possible reason did they have to question him? James Comey hadn't been fired. I think the DOJ has a point.
Annette
The case against General Petraeus began differently than Gen. Flynn. Gen Petraeus was head of the CIA at the time. Someone reported that his girlfriend was stalking and harassing a friend of his. The FBI was called in and when Petraeus was asked if he provided his girlfriend, who was writing his autobiography, any access to top secret information, he denied it. He denied having an affair or giving her his notebooks , which included top secret information. He was charged with a crime and many wanted him to get jailtime. He made a deal with, wait for it, Robert Mueller, who was head of the FBI at the time. No jail time--2 yrs probation and 40,000 fine. He resigned but has been asked for his advise through the yrs.
The DOJ says that at the time Flynn was questioned there was no basis for an investigation at that time. So, no matter what Flynn said he shouldn't have been questioned and thus his answers are irrelevant. The DOJ drops cases all the time Defendants plead guilty and can change their plea to not guilty at any time. The judge has not sentenced here, and if the DOJ wants the case dismissed, I don't see that as a miscarriage of justice. I gave my own personal reasons in my above posts. Yes, I think this is political, but Gen Flynn didn't do anything criminal. What is he being punished for? The was nothing significant in what he said. I don't care that this move has invoked 1000 prosecutors to say the Justice system is ruined... Courts dismiss cases every day.
Politically Trump doesn't want to pardon. He wants innocent, so he can claim he was also innocent. Pardons you have to accept guilt as part of the pardon.
Thats the best I have.
The incident with Gen Flynn happened 4 days after the inauguration. What possible reason did they have to question him? James Comey hadn't been fired. I think the DOJ has a point.
Annette
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2014
- Messages
- 10,017
@smitcompton Thank you for explaining the situation with General Petraeus. I hadn’t followed that closely at the time it was in the news.
I’ve been thinking of you and hope you are doing ok.
I’ve been thinking of you and hope you are doing ok.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,166
There is an update in the Michael Flynn case.
"WASHINGTON — Accusing the Justice Department of a 'gross abuse of prosecutorial power,' a former mafia prosecutor and retired federal judge urged a court on Wednesday to reject the Trump administration’s attempt to drop the criminal case against Michael T. Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser.
'The government has engaged in highly irregular conduct to benefit a political ally of the president,' wrote John Gleeson, who was appointed to a special role to argue against the Justice Department’s unusual effort to drop the Flynn case. He added: 'Leave of court should not be granted when the explanations the government puts forth are not credible as the real reasons for its dismissal of a criminal charge.'
The Justice Department argued that Mr. Flynn’s lies were not 'material' to any legitimate investigation — rejecting the department’s previous position that his lies were relevant to the counterintelligence inquiry into the scope of Russia’s covert operation to tilt the 2016 election in Mr. Trump’s favor and the nature of links to Trump campaign associates.
www.nytimes.com
"WASHINGTON — Accusing the Justice Department of a 'gross abuse of prosecutorial power,' a former mafia prosecutor and retired federal judge urged a court on Wednesday to reject the Trump administration’s attempt to drop the criminal case against Michael T. Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser.
'The government has engaged in highly irregular conduct to benefit a political ally of the president,' wrote John Gleeson, who was appointed to a special role to argue against the Justice Department’s unusual effort to drop the Flynn case. He added: 'Leave of court should not be granted when the explanations the government puts forth are not credible as the real reasons for its dismissal of a criminal charge.'
The Justice Department argued that Mr. Flynn’s lies were not 'material' to any legitimate investigation — rejecting the department’s previous position that his lies were relevant to the counterintelligence inquiry into the scope of Russia’s covert operation to tilt the 2016 election in Mr. Trump’s favor and the nature of links to Trump campaign associates.
...
'Pursuant to an active investigation into whether President Trump’s campaign officials coordinated activities with the government of Russia, one of those officials lied to the F.B.I. about coordinating activities with the government of Russia,' Mr. Gleeson wrote. 'It is hard to conceive of a more material false statement than this one.'"
Outsider Tapped in Flynn Case Calls Justice Dept. Reversal a ‘Gross Abuse’ of Power (Published 2020)
A former federal judge said that the attorney general gave special treatment to a presidential ally, undermining public confidence in the rule of law.
S
smitcompton
Guest
Hi,
This case does interest me. I assure you I won't be heartbroken if it goes either way. I read that Flynn's attorneys will take this to the Supreme Court if they have to. I i did read the transcript of the call to the Russian ambassador and I did not find anything on that call to be damming to Flynn or Russia. He asked for a measured response to Obama kicking out rRussians from our shores. Nothing sinister as Adam Schiff was inferring. And usually I like Adam Schiff.
,I am following it.
Annette
This case does interest me. I assure you I won't be heartbroken if it goes either way. I read that Flynn's attorneys will take this to the Supreme Court if they have to. I i did read the transcript of the call to the Russian ambassador and I did not find anything on that call to be damming to Flynn or Russia. He asked for a measured response to Obama kicking out rRussians from our shores. Nothing sinister as Adam Schiff was inferring. And usually I like Adam Schiff.
,I am following it.
Annette
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2004
- Messages
- 6,633
I haven't researched this too much, but my understanding is that Flynn admitted that he did talk with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States. What they talked about was sanctions and that Trump would not follow through on sanctions once he was in office. (And Trump WAS soft to Russia after he became president. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/17/house-rebukes-trump-russia-sanctions-1108939). This is incredibly relevant considering that there was a widespread campaign from Russia and Russian actors to get Trump elected. And that people who worked for Trump's campaign and indeed for the White house afterwards were involved. This is not under dispute either. What is extremely concerning about Flynn's admission is that is sounds that there is quid pro quo: you help me get elected, and Trump will give you things in exchange for that (change in US foreign policy).
This is exactly the kind of stuff that the constitution was trying to protect us from: Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution,[1] Foreign emoluents clause was designed to shield the federal officeholders of the United States against so-called "corrupting foreign influences." There is also this code:
18 US Code 953 Private correspondence with foreign govenments: 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.
Anyways what he did was illegal. He also of course lied to investigators but that is not the main point. If none that that troubles you (the fact he was working behind the back of the official government, with a foreign country) the fact that if we allow this case to be dismissed, by the very same token we are saying it is OK for a huge percentage of people currently serving prison time to appeal their sentences and be set free, if pleading guilty is now considered insufficient grounds to convict someone. Which I hope all of you find as ridiculous as I do.
This is exactly the kind of stuff that the constitution was trying to protect us from: Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution,[1] Foreign emoluents clause was designed to shield the federal officeholders of the United States against so-called "corrupting foreign influences." There is also this code:
18 US Code 953 Private correspondence with foreign govenments: 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.
Anyways what he did was illegal. He also of course lied to investigators but that is not the main point. If none that that troubles you (the fact he was working behind the back of the official government, with a foreign country) the fact that if we allow this case to be dismissed, by the very same token we are saying it is OK for a huge percentage of people currently serving prison time to appeal their sentences and be set free, if pleading guilty is now considered insufficient grounds to convict someone. Which I hope all of you find as ridiculous as I do.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2004
- Messages
- 6,633
Intel shows that trump put alot of pressure to lift the sanctions related to election interference, basically as soon as he got into office in 2017. https://www.npr.org/2017/06/02/5312...-made-secret-efforts-to-ease-russia-sanctions
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,166
Thank you for posting this. It is on the record that members of Trump's campaign, before he was elected, told the Russians not to worry about Obama (thereby undermining President Obama and US foreign policy which called for sanctions). Then after Trump was elected and they got into power they tried to end all sanctions against Russia. And many sanctions against Russia were ended. We have some happy Russian oligarchs now.
Last edited:
S
smitcompton
Guest
Hi,
My understanding is that there is nothing illegal about a transition team dealing with other countries. He was not a private citizen ,but the designated National Security Advisor for the newly elected administration. This goes on by any newly elected Gov. What I read is there is nothing illegal here. Don't you think Mueller would have charged that.? He lied about his contacts with the Russians.
Frankly, they all lied. Where is Jarrod Kushner in all this. How many times did he need to "correct" his contact list. They all lied about it. Only Flynn goes to jail. The one person who already served his country.
Annette
My understanding is that there is nothing illegal about a transition team dealing with other countries. He was not a private citizen ,but the designated National Security Advisor for the newly elected administration. This goes on by any newly elected Gov. What I read is there is nothing illegal here. Don't you think Mueller would have charged that.? He lied about his contacts with the Russians.
Frankly, they all lied. Where is Jarrod Kushner in all this. How many times did he need to "correct" his contact list. They all lied about it. Only Flynn goes to jail. The one person who already served his country.
Annette
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2004
- Messages
- 6,633
What he did wrong was that he was not acting or advising as nsa for Obama, or for our current foreign policy at that time. In fact he hinted that sanctions may change under Trump. He was not authorized to make any such promises. In fact, once people got wind of Trump trying to undo sanctions for Ukraine and election interference, there was bipartisan support to quickly put up guardrails to prevent Trump from unilaterally removing sanctions without the approval of Congress.
The Ultimate Guide to Men’s Wedding Bands: Metals, Fit & Finish
The Ultimate Guide to Men’s Wedding Bands: Metals, Fit & Finish - 06/27
Chipped Diamonds: Causes, Risks, and What You Should Do About It
Chipped Diamonds: Causes, Risks, and What You Should Do About It - 06/27
300x240.png)