Our Guy Flynn

[SuburbanFarmer]

You guys take this horseplay to another board. Don't go defiling this master piece of a thread which discussed in depth the war taking place with-in the US Counter-Intelligence community.[/quote

If anything I am demonstrating the dishonest lengths that bitch, GCF will go through just to tryto get a W. ]

This is really getting sad now.

[clubgop]

I'm not persuaded that you would need to prove a conferred benefit to prove collusive conduct. You could argue that its absence is a mitigating factor, but I think the elements would involve different proofs. To use a simple analogy, attempted murder is punished less harshly than murder, but they're both illegal. Similarly, we punish people who offer material support to terrorists, even though in fact they are dealing with the FBI.

Can you point to me the statute that makes "collusion" illegal? While I appreciate your legal mind on this. I know the argument I am making is political, not legal. The fact you have to point this out makes it clear that this whole thing is at this point and for several months now, just a political shit show. The fact that the only answer I can get is first an outright lie and then an artful dodge provides me with all I need to know.

"Collusion" isn't really a legal term; "conspiracy" is. The order appointing Bob Mueller states that he "is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:

(i) any links an or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and

(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and

(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).

It further provides that if "the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters."

From what I have read, the federal election statute that has been discussed is 52 U.S. Code § 30121, "Contributions and donations by foreign nationals," which states,

(a) Prohibition - It shall be unlawful for—

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;

(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or

(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or

(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

(b) “Foreign national” defined As used in this section, the term “foreign national” means—

(1) a foreign principal, as such term is defined by section 611(b) of title 22, except that the term “foreign national” shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States; or

(2) an individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 1101(a)(22) of title 8) and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined by section 1101(a)(20) of title 8.

If two or more people were to agree to do something in violation of this statute, that would be your conspiracy count under 18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States:

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

There are significant legal hurdles to relying on § 30121, relating primarily to the requirement of Subparagraphs (1)(A) and (2) that the foreign national make, or a person accept, "a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value." As Jonathan Turley has noted, "If the receipt of opposition research from a foreigner is now equivalent to receiving illegal campaign funds, the law would extend to foreign academics, public interest groups, nongovernment organizations, and journalists supplying information to a campaign." But this objection has more to do with how broadly "other thing of value" should be defined, than to whether someone attempted or successfully completed the making and acceptance of the "other thing of value." In fact, § 30121 does not require any proof that Russia actually (to use your terms) "got something" (e.g., an advantageous shift in American foreign policy) in exchange for the contribution or donation. It merely requires the making or the receiving of the donation, etc. be "in connection with a Federal, State, or local election."

Thanks. As I said I was not making a legal point just a political one. That is the realm I am operating in. Take a look at the Comey, Hillary Clinton email thing. She violated statute, intent is meaningless, but because this whole thing is operating in a political realm it didnt happen. I think this is in the same vein. Someone is going to get a slap on the wrist over some process crime and everything about Russia, if there is anythimg is goong to get quashed cause there is no way sources and methods are hoing to get revealed in open court.

[clubgop]

You guys take this horseplay to another board. Don't go defiling this master piece of a thread which discussed in depth the war taking place with-in the US Counter-Intelligence community.[/quote

If anything I am demonstrating the dishonest lengths that bitch, GCF will go through just to tryto get a W. ]

This is really getting sad now.

Yes it is. You lying dirty dick bitch.

[kybkh]

Interesting timeline...

https://twitter.com/ThomasWictor/status ... 1128367104

[C-Mag]

Curious stuff going on with General Flynn right now.

Mueller pushed the sentencing back to May, no reason given.

People are looking into what exactly was Mike Flynns lies and they are having trouble nailing down what it is.

NPR says, Intelligence Official: Transcripts Of Flynn's Calls Don't Show Criminal Wrongdoing



In March 2017, then-FBI director James Comey briefed a number of Capitol Hill lawmakers on the Trump-Russia investigation. One topic of intense interest was the case of Michael Flynn. ...............According to two sources familiar with the meetings, Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional. As a result, some of those in attendance came away with the impression that Flynn would not be charged with a crime pertaining to the January 24 interview.
https://truepundit.com/comey-told-congr ... lynn-lied/

I don't pretend to know what's going on with this, I just find it curious. May be nothing, he may be charged as everyone assumes he will.

[kybkh]

Without question, Flynn was Obama & Co. #1 target. Begs the question why?

Why did they want him gone so badly??

[C-Mag]

Without question, Flynn was Obama & Co. #1 target. Begs the question why?

Why did they want him gone so badly??

Oh, that's an easy one. Flynn was head of the DNI and he was called before Congress and gave honest answers on how the Obama Administration aided, funded and armed ISIS when the Admin was warned of the exact result that occurred.

[kybkh]

12) Based on facts & reviewing the Flynn docket, it appears that the effort to have Flynn’s guilty charge & plea deal thrown out has begun. This is a big deal....I would expect that this “private individual” is working on bringing their evidence public in the coming days.

https://twitter.com/Nick_Falco/status/9 ... 7057899521

Line 12 states- “Motion to Intervene/Friend of the Court/Amicus Brief (Fruit of the Poisonous Tree) of a Sitting President and His Family”



This motion was denied & the letter about Mueller was sealed.

[C-Mag]

12) Based on facts & reviewing the Flynn docket, it appears that the effort to have Flynn’s guilty charge & plea deal thrown out has begun. This is a big deal....I would expect that this “private individual” is working on bringing their evidence public in the coming days.

Good Post

Looks like Mueller is going to have to prove his entire investigation is legit and based on solid evidence that crimes were committed.

[C-Mag]

The case against Flynn is looking increasingly sketchy

On November 30th, 2017, Mike Flynn signed a guilty plea; ostensibly admitting lying to investigators. The plea was accepted by Judge Ruben Contreras; who is also a FISA court judge. Six days later, December 7th, 2017, Judge Contreras “was recused” from the case without explanation. The case was reassigned to DC District Judge Emmet Sullivan.

The Contreras recusal always seemed sketchy. If the conflict existed on December 7th, wouldn’t that same conflict have existed on November 30th, 2017?

On December 12th, 2017, Judge Sullivan gave out a rather unusual set of instructions to Robert Mueller. The instructions included Sullivan telling Mueller to turn over to the Flynn defense anything that could be considered exculpatory:


[…] if the government has identified any information which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes is not material, the government shall submit the material to the Court for in camera review.

On January 31st, 2018, Robert Mueller requested a delay of sentencing pushing the sentencing phase into May of this year. And then yesterday, February 14th, 2018, Mueller asks for the information he is turning over to be sealed.

“Today’s Stipulated Motion gives the Flynn team access to ALL evidence, including the FD-302’s, as long as the evidence is kept secret.”
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 ... plication/

Time to see if the Mueller investigation was legit or Fruit of the Poisonous Tree