DoJ drops case against Flynn.
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
Not in Trump's case: Ivanka, Donald Jr., & Eric Trump have been afforded enormously prestigious positions within the Trump Foundation, lucrative money-making opportunities, well-paid advisory positions, & enormous access to the Federal Government, despite having no real relevant experience.
Hunter Biden's position was almost certainly also tinged with nepotism, but he was at least a doctor of Jurisprudence & had executive experience in the past. Plus, of course, his position was given to him by a private company, whereas the Trump family have been given positions & access within the Federal Government.
Do you actually find drug use to be that pearl-clutchingly awful? That it should render somebody "unemployable"?
I hope you don't ever dig into the history of the Tories over here.
Right, except this is just another conspiracy theory, isn't it? There isn't any actual proof. There's nothing outside the delirious ranting of the President.
Hey, do you know who else was thought to be on the side of the 'ordinary Americans'. Obama. And Bush. And Clinton. And Reagan. And now Biden. It's almost like 'ordinary American' actually means anyone who agrees with the person in question.
Hey, hate crimes are up... but he's for all races right? You know who also says he's for all races - Biden. And I don't believe him either. And he at least as a record of helping minority races.
How is Fox, run by a rich foreigner (well, recently turned immigrant after decades), not part of the global elite? How is Trump not a global elitist? Trump definitely tries to influence the media, so does that make any media who doesn't listen to him automatically good?
Lastly, when you say 'people think', how many people do you actually think this? And don't say all American because it's definitely not even half. I would say about an 1/8
In and of itself, heck to the no. But being possibly dishonorably discharged? I don't care if your farts fix the ozone layer. You're toxic then. For Hunter to have been discharged for drug abuse given his connections. He must have been doing heroin shots in front of his C.O. on the daily. And Joe bragged about getting the prosecutor fired. Allegedly for not prosecuting hard enough. No worries: The IMF has members that too wanted the guy gone. That's like saying Bonnie vouches for Clyde.
I know I've been posting way too much stuff around here. I need to give others a turn. Someone should ask the things you ask in a thread. For now, I will do some surfing. Styx is saying the aggregate has Trump in the safe mid-40s with the real election not even starting yet.
Does any of Trump's supporters think he has a genuine race based animus against anyone? Personally? I really doubt it.
1: why is he acting like pleading guilty is only done by the guilty or those that do not think they have defenses? Because one can plead guilty to avoid incredible hardships.
2: He goes on to speak of things Flynn did that sound shady. But we have all sorts of records that show Flynn had been cleared by the FBI but they were still out to nail him for something, anything, including the possibly un-Constitutional Logan act. If Flynn had obviously violated laws, why on Earth would they pursuit Flynn for violation of the Logan act, which is never enforced?
This guy does not absolve Flynn but does not appear to have drunk the kool aid:
Last edited:
Just a quick question. What has Trump said about other countries?
Many of those who died at Jonestown believed Jim Jones was their savior as they willingly drank the grape flavor aid. How did that turn out for them?
Maybe listening to cultists isn't the best way to determine the truth about their leader?
Other countries are not races. And even, for the sake of argument, if he thinks one can find statistical disparities between identifiable demographic groups, does he have animus against any of them? Again, I really doubt it. Before the pandemic, wages were rising for the first time in decades. At first we were told not to believe our lying wallets. Then we were told he was just continuing Obama's economic trends. Even though Obama is on record saying one would need a magic wand to do what Trump did. I think, with that kind of evidence, Trump wants US citizens and legal residents, of all races, to do well economically.
Maybe you should start a thread asking Trump supporters why they do so. That way you may learn the differences between Trump and Jim Jones. Or Pol Pot. Or Stalin. Or other of the greatest collectivist mass murderers of all time, like Jim Jones.
No. It is that the media never implied blame on Jim Jones for people drinking fish tank cleaner.
Did Trump give bad advice? Yes. Did he fail to warn people to wait until its tested? Yes. Did he say they should force it through FDA approval? Yes. Did someone listen to his advice and act on it? Yes. DID EVERYONE SAY THAT YOU SHOULDNT SAY THAT INCASE SOMEONE DOESNT UNDERSTAND THE CONSEQUENCES? Yes. Did Trump deliberately tell someone to drink it? NO. Did he IMPLY that it was safe? Yes.
We all know how damaging IMPLYING can be. But sure, lets worry about the media who are generally point out facts in an uncomfortable way for Trump and not the one who implied something was safe and it wasn't.
Let's take an example, shall we. Trump has been blaming China for the virus. This has lead directly to people attacking Asian-Americans on the street. Trump may not say something racist, but people sure are taking as a reason to be racist. (Oh, wait, we're back to implying again, aren't we.) It's why Bush bent over backwards to separate terrorists from Muslims. Yes, the terrorist in 9/11 were Muslim. Not all Muslims are terrorists. Even if someone did something against Muslims, he could say that he made an effort not to incite violence.
For a less threatening (to you) example, let's take Africans in South China. The Chinese government stated that African (like actual African not citizens and immigrants in China) aren't clean (because most countries have racism) and spreading the virus. This hasn't been proven to be true but violence ensued. Did the Chinese government tell their citizens to attack fellow African-Chinese? No. Did they state they were a problem and the citizens decided to deal with it, even when they are themselves Chinese citizens (just with black skin)? Yes. See also Uyghur. Yes, some Uyghur did terrorist attacks. No, not all did and they shouldn't all be rounded up for 're-education'
Wait, isn't most wallet filling due to Fight for 15, which Obama and Trump both haven't supported? I.e. not due to economic reasons but colelctive action
There seems to be little confusion over the fact that the prosecutor Biden and most of the rest of the EU wanted fired was inactive in the face of corruption. Hunter Biden apparently tested positive for cocaine in his urine. He was discharged from the Navy Reserve, but not dishonorably.
There's a Ukrainian oligarch called Dmitri Firtash; he has extensive links with Russia as a middleman between the big Russian firm Gazprom and Ukraine. Firtash is persona non grata in Ukraine due to corruption charges, and wanted by the USA for extradition on bribery and racketeering charges. (He also has been or is under criminal investigation in other countries on similar charges). Firtash was pumping money at Lev Parnas, assocaite of Trump and Giuliani and lead in their digging around in Ukraine, and part of the scam to remove the US ambassador to the Ukraine, Marie Yovanovich. Firtash had previously employed Trump team general scumbag Paul Manafort, and was also employing two American lawyers, Victoria Toensing and Joseph DiGenova, who are also associates of Giuliniani and Trump, representing the latter in legal matters (and were frequent guests on Fox News), and the ones passing information to journalist John Solomon to print up lies and rumour into the US media.
If we want to talk actual conspiracies, the Ukraine affair actually revealed one: Giuliani, Parnas, Toensing and DiGenova, all Trump associates, two clearly working on the behest of the president, forming a deeply inappropriate alliance with a corrupt Ukrainian businessman who intended to use those connections to sway US politicians. Donald Trump, in his mad dash to dig up dirt, essentially brought corrupt foreign money right to the doorstep of the White House.
You can plead guilty. However, you might not normally twice admit your guilt in court testimony under oath, too.
Okay, you're an FBI officer. You have a general remit to protect national security, and have been given a specific remit to investigate Russian interference in US elections. Before you is a man set to become National Security Advisor has had personal dealings in Russia, including taking payments from a Russian state broadcast company. So you investigate him, it seems okay... and then you find out he's been having undisclosed meetings with Russian officials that he's lied to everyone, including his bosses, about. And what... you just close the case? Or do you make extra, extra sure that you didn't miss something, and this man sitting in a position of incredible power and sensitivity isn't compromised?
He pretty much just uncritically restates the DoJ's case rather than analysing its relative strengths and weaknesses. But it is evident a lot of lawyers think there are problems with it.
1: The Democratic party was softer on the response to the virus early on than was Trump. To this day, I do not know the Democrats were wrong. Whole other topic.
2: If Obama supported it, and that were the only explanation for rising wages, I don't think he would have said Trump would need a magic wand to, in fact, do what he did.
3. That sounds like saying Bonnie vouched for Clyde.
4. Highly unlikely that is all that happened (testing positive once). And do you have a link to his discharge status? I had been unable to definitivly find what it was (general or other). Again, Hunter has very high connections. That alone would be very unlikely to do it. To this day, with his greasy hair, I'm wondering if he is still doing smack (Junkies hold that not washing your hair gives you a better, longer high).
I'm surprised there are not FBI members facing charges for attempted insurrection and if found guilty, hung as traitors. Flynn had been investigated and found, short of violation of the Logan Act, to be clean. Sorry, unless your into entrapment, your job is done there. (They do have on record an effort to get him to admit Logan Act violation. They did not even need to speak to him about that. They had on record sufficient facts, if they really wanted to go forward with it. Odd, they never did; just the entrapment stuff).
Not Guilty is not the same as innocent. If this thing does continue to go forward, expect it to be ultimately thrown out due to the investigator's malfeasance.
Last edited:
"He must have been"...? All we know is that his urine tested positive for cocaine. Everything else is assumption.
Regarding Joe Biden bragging about getting Shokin fired, let's look at the actual text of the statement;
This is really stupid, classless stuff from Biden. That said, the context of the brag itself is about Shokin refusing to pursue corruption cases. There's international consensus that this was the case. And the National Anti-Corruption Bureau has confirmed that Shokin was not even investigating Burisma at the time Joe Biden made this call.Joe Biden said:
So, we again come down to assumption on your part; an assumption that doesn't rest on anything concrete, on any actual evidence of a relevant investigation into Burisma.
A guy runs out of a bank carrying sacks of cash. He is drenched in blood, breathing heavily. Alarm bells are ringing within the bank and can be heard outside. The man looks around wildly. There is a car parked 10 feet away, driver in place and the motor is running. The man, drenched in blood, holding large sacks of cash, so over-filled money is spilling out of them, runs to and jumps into the car. He makes no effort to reclaim the money that has spilled out of the sacks. The car he jumped into does a "jack rabbit" start, violating local traffic laws.
And you think the only thing to discuss here is a minor violation of traffic law?
How? It wasn't within their power to respond to it, as that's the job of the executive.
Obama said it would take a magic wand to bring back some jobs. He's right. Industries die, and that's just that.
He immediately went on to say in that speech that the economy needs to prepare and support new industries. What he's effectively saying is that industries that outsourced to China or Vietnam aren't going to suddenly come back, and nothing is going to make coal a fuel of the future. Trump was effectively selling Americans a comforting but fake vision of restoring the glories of yesteryear, when it actually needs to make new glories.
In what way?
A simple administrative discharge looks like pretty normal procedure (source):
"Navy/Marine Corps members will typically face Mast/NJP and then an administrative discharge proceeding "
Entrapment requires tricking or coercing someone into committing a crime they otherwise would not have done. Flynn's inclination to lie is already plain because he lied to the VP. He then lied entirely voluntarily and freely to the FBI. Any lawyer worth his salt will tell you if there's one thing you don't do, it's lie to an official investigation. If the National Security Advisor was too stupid and immoral to follow such basic guidance (on top of lying to the VP), he deserves everything he got.
It is totally up to you to support a system where the law is afraid to or criticaly impeded in doing their duty and investigating politicians, because if you want your country to be like a Brazil, Egypt or Myanmar, that is totally your right.
10 Companies That Are Bringing Jobs Back to America
President Donald Trump started the trend with Carrier, and we’ve put together a list of 10 companies that are bringing jobs back to America.
investorplace.com
The Ukraine sounds like a play ground for the corrupt. The IMF may have wanted this guy fired to cover their own corruption. But in politics, sometimes one may not directly benefit from an action but now someone owes you a favor. Joe apparently needed to cover up for his un-employable son and get that prosecutor fired. Joe would not want a better prosecutor. His son was apparently selling his dad's office. If you are in the IMF and you back Joe, Joe now owes you a solid. You've done him a favor. You can collect later.
The time Flynn allegedly lied to the FBI, they were having a conversation that never should have happened. It happened with the FBI recording their intention: to get him to commit a crime he would not have otherwise done as, again, the conversation should not have happened. Lying in other instances that are not material doesn't count.
Am I wrong? We'll see as this thing plays out. But I really believe: to have a dictatorship, have enough laws to make criminals of everyone and then, as appears to be the case here, selectively prosecute.
I think to administratively discharge the son of the VP (2014) you'd need a lot more than one potentially wrong urine test. Even flunking it, Hunter would have likely gone to the brig for 30 days. Maybe sweep base sidewalks. Instead he was discharged. Admitting this to a normal company in normal circumstances for any thing other than a menial job? I think for any major job he'd be unemployable.
From someone arguing that Flynn is a hero despite criminally lying to the law and his boss, honestly I don't think you're in a good place to question what's important to prosecute.
And frankly, fuck Hunter Biden. Who cares? He's an overprivileged twit with enormous ability to fail upwards because of his privilege, but he's small fry in the greater scheme of things. If foreign companies want to chuck money at him to twiddle his thumbs, it's annoying, but it's their money.
He's not Jared Kushner, who gets to swan around the White House looking at confidential material and deciding important things despite having no qualifications for the job except being husband of Trump's favourite child (his child who he'd totally bang, were she not his child). Who got into Harvard because of his parents' donations. Who was up against security concerns that the president just overruled on a whim. Who's daddy went to jail for fraud. Who went off to Israel ostensibly for a "peace" plan, and whose company promptly started aggressively seeking business deals with Israel. And whose company was busy flogging visas to the Chinese in return for money, or getting various Chinese, Saudis, Qataris etc. to buy out his bad debt on 666 Fifth Avenue on "unusually favourable" terms which I'm sure has nothing at all to do with his political position.
As you're busy praising Trump illegally investigating some upper-class good-for-nothing because it'll get dirt on his dad, you're squealing blue murder at the very notion that anyone dare use normal legal channels to scrutinise Orange Blobby and the vast morass of dodgy, corrupt, self-enriching people around him. Even just a few days ago, an inspector general announced he needed to investigate Mike Pompeo for he and his wife's improper use of state resources, and the next day he was fired. All of this you justify with some nebulous conspiracy about "Deep State".
Honestly, at this juncture, you may as well just advocate declaring Trump dictator for life, letting him appoint Congress personally, and making every law and military agency directly responsible to him personally, because apparently no-one's clean except Trump and anyone he wants running things.
GWB was an alcoholic who also almost certainly spent years snorting cocaine. Didn't stop him running a sizeable company, a major sports team and becoming president.
It does but its Trump who has numerous corrupt cronies running around the place while Biden's son is just employed and Trump dearly wishing that this is terribly corrupt so he can get an electoral edge.
And there are a lot of hypothetical in that statement. We know that everyone wanted the prosecutor gone because he's corrupt. That much is a fact. The idea that those wanting the prosecutor gone because they themselves are corrupt is a hypothetical scenario. I mean, if Biden really was so irredeemably corrupt wouldn't it have been in his interest to keep the corrupt prosecutor around? He wasn't investigated Hunter and due to being corrupt its doubtful he ever would. But by removing the prosecutor Biden risk having him replaced by someone who actually does his job, which is something Biden wouldn't have done if he was willfully being corrupt. A corrupt prosecutor who shield corruption would be exactly what Biden needed if he was corrupt, yet he removed that prosecutor and risked installing one that's not corrupt. Why would a man with apparently so much to hide take that course?