ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags court cases , donald trump , Michael Flynn , perjury cases , Robert Mueller , William Barr

Reply
Old 7th May 2020, 03:40 PM   #41
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,733
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That wasn't what he was charged with, that wasn't what he plead to, and that had nothing to do with why he was being investigated.

He was part of the broader investigation into Russia's influence on the election and the new President, and he lied about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.
Quote:
Mr. Flynn’s discussions with Sergey I. Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, were part of a coordinated effort by Mr. Trump’s aides to create foreign policy before they were in power, documents released as part of Mr. Flynn’s plea agreement show. Their efforts undermined the existing policy of President Barack Obama and flouted a warning from a senior Obama administration official to stop meddling in foreign affairs before the inauguration.
Quote:
“I recognize that the actions I acknowledged in court today were wrong, and, through my faith in God, I am working to set things right,” Mr. Flynn said. “My guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the special counsel’s office reflect a decision I made in the best interests of my family and of our country. I accept full responsibility for my actions.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/u...stigation.html

And now his claim is what? "Those meany FBI agents tricked me. They didn't tell me how much they already knew." The real tragedy is that the judge kept putting off his sentencing. He could have been put away (and realistically would probably only have gotten a few months inside) at least a year ago.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 04:29 PM   #42
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
He was part of the broader investigation into Russia's influence on the election and the new President
Nothing about the Flynn investigation had anything whatsoever to do with the election. And despite the attempt to portray Flynn as having violated the Logan act, nothing about his phone call with the Russian ambassador was either illegal or even improper.

Quote:
And now his claim is what?
Well, for one thing, the prosecution violated its legal obligations to turn over Brady material. For another, there was no valid predicate for the Flynn investigation in the first place.

Quote:
"Those meany FBI agents tricked me. They didn't tell me how much they already knew."
Here's the kicker: we don't actually have any proof that Flynn even lied. The FBI has a policy of not recording interviews, and we don't even have the original interview notes. We only have what amounts to third-hand testimony about what Flynn supposedly lied about.

Quote:
The real tragedy is that the judge kept putting off his sentencing. He could have been put away (and realistically would probably only have gotten a few months inside) at least a year ago.
Thanks for demonstrating that you haven't been following the trial. There's a damn good reason sentencing kept being postponed, and the latest document dump confirms that the judge was right to delay.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 04:39 PM   #43
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 83,710
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The JD did not say that Flynn didn't lie (which Flynn admitted he did), only that they can't "prove it" BARD.

Uh huh.
I've only heard bits and pieces and don't care to waste my time looking. But I was under the impression Barr made some effort to say the questioning itself was inappropriate.

It's a twofur: Diss the whole Mueller report hoax, chipping away at it with these little assertions the investigation was flawed. Hey, it worked for OJ.

And get Flynn off at the same time.


Trump needs to protect a few past insiders lest the current ones fear getting tossed under the bus when it is their turn.
__________________
Thousands of COMMUTATIONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (2009-2017)

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 04:42 PM   #44
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 83,710
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
If there was blatant state overreach then dropping the charges may be the right thing to do, regardless of how one feels about Trump.


Really, you're going with that?

Or is this sarcasm?
__________________
Thousands of COMMUTATIONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (2009-2017)

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 04:46 PM   #45
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 21,463
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The Department of Justice has withdrawn its case against Michael Flynn.

https://apnews.com/ae1ad252bb13490db2ceffc5d17b6d92

This is not terribly surprising, given recent revelations about how the case against Flynn started, and given that the prosecution illegally withheld this information until now. Van Grack is up a creek without a paddle, and he knows it.
For now. Once we get an American in charge of DOJ, we'll see.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 04:52 PM   #46
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 83,710
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I have mixed feelings about this.

The feds really seem to enjoy setting up perjury scenarios and nailing people for them, especially if they can't make a larger case. Generally speaking, I am never really comfortable with this. Opponents of Flynn really care more about his involvement with the extremely corrupt Trump election campaign than they do about the importance of not lying to federal agents.

I also have no illusion that Barr's justice department is dropping this after a come-to-jesus moment about this practice. This is obviously about bailing out Trump loyalists. No-one else finding themselves in the perjury trap can expect to get relief, unless they are doing dirty work for Trump.

The Trump era has made for some strange bedfellows. You have libs cheering on federal law enforcement, and conservatives bemoaning the overreach of law enforcement.

Strange times indeed.
Let's have a little review here folks.

Flynn's lie was that he had had no Russian contact. Not only was that a lie, but he was acting as a rep of a foreign government and failed to register as one. And he didn't declare certain income from said position when he was supposed to declare it.

And the backdrop for this was SIGNIFICANT RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE US FEDERAL ELECTION!!!!!!!!!


Factcheck Flynn Timeline
Quote:
Flynn also admitted that he lied to investigators about a Dec. 29 conversation that he had with Kislyak. On the day of the conversation, the Obama administration announced sanctions against Russia in response to Russia’s meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Flynn called to discuss the new sanctions with “a senior official” of the Trump transition team “who was with other senior members of the Presidential Transition Team at the Mar-a-Lago resort” that Trump owns in Florida.

Immediately after the call to Mar-a-Lago, Flynn called Kislyak and “requested that Russia not escalate the situation and only respond to the U.S. Sanctions in a reciprocal manner,” the plea agreement said. Kislyak agreed that Russia would “moderate its response to those sanctions” as a result of his request, according to the U.S. special counsel’s office.

But, when interviewed by the FBI on Jan. 24, Flynn denied making such a request and could not recall if Kislyak agreed to his request....

...(It is later learned that he was paid $45,000 for his appearance, and failed to report the income on his government financial disclosure forms.)...

... Flynn reports his consulting firm being paid $530,000. According to USA Today‘s report of Flynn’s lobbying work, “the Flynn Intel Group hired researchers to examine Fethullah Gulen, a reclusive Islamic cleric who lives in exile in rural Pennsylvania. [Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan has blamed Gulen’s opposition group for an attempted 2016 coup and has sought his extradition. ...
The corruption goes on and on and on.


Has everyone forgotten? Hello?
__________________
Thousands of COMMUTATIONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (2009-2017)

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 7th May 2020 at 04:53 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:06 PM   #47
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Duplicate
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:14 PM   #48
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The JD did not say that Flynn didn't lie (which Flynn admitted he did), only that they can't "prove it" BARD.

Uh huh.
No, that's not what the DOJ said. You can find out what they said here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/4603...ynn#from_embed
It's not just proving that he lied. That doesn't actually suffice for a crime. There are other elements to the crime as well, elements that the DOJ doesn't believe it can prove because, well, they don't exist.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:22 PM   #49
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Let's have a little review here folks.

Flynn's lie was that he had had no Russian contact.
No it wasn't. He never denied his phone call to the FBI.

Quote:
Not only was that a lie, but he was acting as a rep of a foreign government and failed to register as one.
You are confused. He was not acting as a representative of a foreign government in his phone call with the Russian ambassador, or any other Russians.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:22 PM   #50
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,733
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Nothing about the Flynn investigation had anything whatsoever to do with the election. And despite the attempt to portray Flynn as having violated the Logan act, nothing about his phone call with the Russian ambassador was either illegal or even improper.
The broad concern was about whether Russia had a hold on Trump and/or the people who worked for him, not just about the election. And there were multiple calls and emails.
https://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...meline/516594/

Of course, Flynn had Russian contacts going back to before the election.
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/12/mi...ssia-timeline/

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Well, for one thing, the prosecution violated its legal obligations to turn over Brady material. For another, there was no valid predicate for the Flynn investigation in the first place.
The deputy attorney general was worried that Flynn was making private deals with Russia, lying about it, and was vulnerable to blackmail.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Here's the kicker: we don't actually have any proof that Flynn even lied. The FBI has a policy of not recording interviews, and we don't even have the original interview notes. We only have what amounts to third-hand testimony about what Flynn supposedly lied about
Flynn himself confessed in court that he lied to the FBI. Of course, I can see why you wouldn't believe an admitted liar.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Thanks for demonstrating that you haven't been following the trial. There's a damn good reason sentencing kept being postponed, and the latest document dump confirms that the judge was right to delay.
The "damn good reason" was that he promised to cooperate with investigators, and the delay was to give him ample opportunity to do so, in so doing reducing his sentence. You might recall that at one sentencing hearing the judge warned him that it might not go well for him, and he should go back and try again.

Quote:
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn expected to be sentenced Tuesday by a federal judge.

But after almost two dramatic hours in a courtroom discussing his crimes, he asked to postpone his sentencing for several months so he can have more of an opportunity to cooperate in federal investigations and attempt to mitigate the judge's disgust with his actions.

"I want to be frank with you, this crime is very serious," federal Judge Emmet Sullivan said in the courtroom Tuesday. "Not only did you lie to the FBI, you lied to senior officials in the incoming administration."
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/18/polit...obe/index.html

And of course we have Trump's word that Flynn lied.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/michael...-to-fbi-pence/

Last edited by Bob001; 7th May 2020 at 05:26 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:23 PM   #51
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,443
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I'm sorry that you feel such personal hostility towards me. But it won't change anything, it will only make you feel miserable.
I get how Captain Swoop feels. He'e ex-military and so am I.

Flynn has betrayed his country, his oath to serve and his code of honor. Military and ex-military people take seriously stuff such as abiding by the oath you took to serve your country. When it comes to that kind of loyalty, there is no such thing as "ex-military".

What Flynn did was an unthinkable act of treachery - its the sort of thing for which I would have no hesitation in dragging him into the O-Club stock room and teaching him a serious lesson about what loyalty to your country means.
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:27 PM   #52
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 6,424
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Let's have a little review here folks.

Flynn's lie was that he had had no Russian contact. Not only was that a lie, but he was acting as a rep of a foreign government and failed to register as one. And he didn't declare certain income from said position when he was supposed to declare it.

And the backdrop for this was SIGNIFICANT RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE US FEDERAL ELECTION!!!!!!!!!


Factcheck Flynn TimelineThe corruption goes on and on and on.


Has everyone forgotten? Hello?
I am of the opinion that lying to feds shouldn't be a crime, at least, not in the very broad way it is now. The Feds have a long history of abusing the tools granted to them. ACAB.

Flynn did lots of illegal stuff besides lying to the feds. Wish our law enforcement were competent enough to stick it to him for that, but they weren't.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 7th May 2020 at 05:35 PM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:36 PM   #53
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post


Really, you're going with that?

Or is this sarcasm?
I didn't say he hadn't done anything wrong. The two things often don't have a lot to do with each other. You can be guilty as sin, and still an example of overreach.
Minoosh is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:38 PM   #54
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 6,424
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I didn't say he hadn't done anything wrong. The two things often don't have a lot to do with each other. You can be guilty as sin, and still an example of overreach.
Exactly.

Randy Weaver was a white supremacist piece of trash. The ATF still botched Ruby Ridge. It's possible for everyone to be the bad guy.

The feds screw things up all the time, even when the target is an unambiguous villain.

Federal law enforcement overreach is a real problem that existed prior to 2016.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:41 PM   #55
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
The broad concern was about whether Russia had a hold on Trump and/or the people who worked for him
And no evidence has ever turned up that they did. Which the FBI knew before they interviewed Flynn. Which is why the investigation into Flynn was going to be closed.

Quote:
And there were multiple calls and emails.
So what? It wasn't improper for Flynn to be in contact with the Russians.

Quote:
Of course, Flynn had Russian contacts going back to before the election.
Also not inappropriate, or even uncommon, given his background and role.

Quote:
The deputy attorney general was worried that Flynn was making private deals with Russia, lying about it, and was vulnerable to blackmail.
Or he was looking for an excuse to keep Crossfire Hurricane going.

Quote:
Flynn himself confessed in court that he lied to the FBI.
And nobody has ever been unfairly coerced into a confession?

Quote:
The "damn good reason" was that he promised to cooperate with investigators,
That was only part of it.

Quote:
You might recall that at one sentencing hearing the judge warned him that it might not go well for him, and he should go back and try again.
And he did. And now he's not going to get convicted.

Quote:
And of course we have Trump's word that Flynn lied.
Lying to Pence isn't a crime.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

Last edited by Ziggurat; 7th May 2020 at 05:42 PM.
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:42 PM   #56
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,733
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I am of the opinion that lying to feds shouldn't be a crime, at least, not in the very broad way it is now. The Feds have a long history of abusing the tools granted to them. ACAB.
....
Why? Lying to the feds (or to any law enforcement) could obstruct an investigation, send investigators in the wrong direction, shield the guilty and implicate the innocent. You don't have to talk to the cops at all, and the time-honored escape hatch from a sticky question has been "I don't know" or "I don't remember." Bu deliberately lying is a crime for good reason.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:51 PM   #57
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,220
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
As one (but not the only) example:
https://www.scribd.com/document/459057200/doc-188
Handwritten note from an agent:
"What's our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?"

Not only is this suggestive of an illegitimate purpose for the investigation of Flynn...
As I suspected, you're full of ****. All that indicates is that there was discussion of what the goals were when it came to questioning a suspect. That's a discussion any LEOs would have in advance of an interrogation. It is in no way exculpatory, no matter how many ****-sipping Republicans claim it to be so.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:52 PM   #58
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,733
Mods, I just note that there appear to be two identical threads on this subject.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 05:53 PM   #59
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 6,424
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Why? Lying to the feds (or to any law enforcement) could obstruct an investigation, send investigators in the wrong direction, shield the guilty and implicate the innocent. You don't have to talk to the cops at all, and the time-honored escape hatch from a sticky question has been "I don't know" or "I don't remember." Bu deliberately lying is a crime for good reason.
Because the feds are notorious abusers of the investigative tools we grant them.

Even prior to the Flynn case, advocates have been complaining about the broadness of this power. It's a position which is very much contested (my bias is clear on this matter), but it should be understood that criminal justice reformers that aren't MAGA cultists have had a problem with this power prior to this.

That said, clearly Barr's intervention here has nothing to do with police reform and everything to do with covering Trump's lackeys.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 7th May 2020 at 06:16 PM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 06:12 PM   #60
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Because the feds are notorious abusers of the investigative tools we grant them.

Even prior to the Flynn case, advocates have been complaining about the broadness of this power.
One of the problems with the FBI in particular, which even local PD's tend to do a better job on, is their policy of not recording interviews. It's absurd that you can be prosecuted for lying when the only evidence that you lied is what the FBI says you said. That's essentially hearsay. It's ridiculous that in this day and age, the FBI doesn't record interviews as the rule, not the exception.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 06:15 PM   #61
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
As I suspected, you're full of ****. All that indicates is that there was discussion of what the goals were when it came to questioning a suspect. That's a discussion any LEOs would have in advance of an interrogation. It is in no way exculpatory, no matter how many ****-sipping Republicans claim it to be so.
It's definitely exculpatory if the interview was done for illegitimate purposes. And entrapment is an illegitimate purpose.

And again, whether or not you personally think this points to a potentially illegitimate purpose, the fact is that a jury might think otherwise. So the defense were entitled to these notes, by law. And they were denied them.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 06:16 PM   #62
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
For now. Once we get an American in charge of DOJ, we'll see.
Yes. We will see that I'm right. Given the new evidence, the judge will dismiss with prejudice, and Flynn will never be recharged.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 06:41 PM   #63
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 83,710
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I didn't say he hadn't done anything wrong. The two things often don't have a lot to do with each other. You can be guilty as sin, and still an example of overreach.
Seems to me his plea deal was hardly an example of overreach.
__________________
Thousands of COMMUTATIONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (2009-2017)

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 06:43 PM   #64
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 83,710
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Exactly.

Randy Weaver was a white supremacist piece of trash. The ATF still botched Ruby Ridge. It's possible for everyone to be the bad guy.

The feds screw things up all the time, even when the target is an unambiguous villain.

Federal law enforcement overreach is a real problem that existed prior to 2016.


You can be serious making this analogy. Why not bring up David Koresh while you're at it. Definitely overreach there too.
__________________
Thousands of COMMUTATIONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (2009-2017)

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:00 PM   #65
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,733
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Because the feds are notorious abusers of the investigative tools we grant them.

Even prior to the Flynn case, advocates have been complaining about the broadness of this power. It's a position which is very much contested (my bias is clear on this matter), but it should be understood that criminal justice reformers that aren't MAGA cultists have had a problem with this power prior to this.
....
I repeat, You don't have to talk to the cops at all, certainly not without a lawyer, and most lawyers would advise you not to do so. But when you say "Tony Macaroni was at my house" when he wasn't, and he gets away with murder because of it, that's a crime. You think that's a problem?
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:04 PM   #66
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,128
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post

And nobody has ever been unfairly coerced into a confession?
Oh, absolutely! But has Flynn ever claimed he was coerced in any way?
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:07 PM   #67
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,128
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Because the feds are notorious abusers of the investigative tools we grant them.

Even prior to the Flynn case, advocates have been complaining about the broadness of this power. It's a position which is very much contested (my bias is clear on this matter), but it should be understood that criminal justice reformers that aren't MAGA cultists have had a problem with this power prior to this.

That said, clearly Barr's intervention here has nothing to do with police reform and everything to do with covering Trump's lackeys.
On that we agree. Trump's been screaming about Flynn since day one.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:10 PM   #68
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,128
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
One of the problems with the FBI in particular, which even local PD's tend to do a better job on, is their policy of not recording interviews. It's absurd that you can be prosecuted for lying when the only evidence that you lied is what the FBI says you said. That's essentially hearsay. It's ridiculous that in this day and age, the FBI doesn't record interviews as the rule, not the exception.
I agree with you about the policy of not recording interviews. EVERY interview by authorities should be recorded.

I highly doubt anyone can be prosecuted by the FBI simply claiming you lied without any corroborating evidence. I challenge that claim.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:17 PM   #69
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Oh, absolutely! But has Flynn ever claimed he was coerced in any way?
Yes.
https://www.scribd.com/document/4581...ENT-MISCONDUCT

"In addition, Mr. Flynn’s counsel has found further evidence of misconduct by Mr. Van Grack specifically. Not only did he make baseless threats to indict Michael G. Flynn, he made a side deal not to prosecute Michael G. Flynn as a material term of the plea agreement, but he required that it be kept secret between himself and the Covington attorneys expressly to avoid the requirement of Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)."
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:20 PM   #70
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I agree with you about the policy of not recording interviews. EVERY interview by authorities should be recorded.

I highly doubt anyone can be prosecuted by the FBI simply claiming you lied without any corroborating evidence. I challenge that claim.
But that's exactly what happens, on a regular basis.

What other corroborating evidence can there even be in such a case? Lies told outside the interview aren't evidence of a crime, because lying isn't generally illegal. Only a lie during an interview is illegal. FBI statements are the only evidence of what happened in the interview, so they are the totality of the evidence.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:27 PM   #71
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,128
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Yes.
https://www.scribd.com/document/4581...ENT-MISCONDUCT

"In addition, Mr. Flynn’s counsel has found further evidence of misconduct by Mr. Van Grack specifically. Not only did he make baseless threats to indict Michael G. Flynn, he made a side deal not to prosecute Michael G. Flynn as a material term of the plea agreement, but he required that it be kept secret between himself and the Covington attorneys expressly to avoid the requirement of Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)."
That is not coercion. Telling a suspect he'll be indicted is not coercion. Offering a plea deal to a suspect in return for his cooperation isn't coercion. What was wrong here was Van Grack (allegedly) requiring the deal to be kept secret which violated Giglio v. US.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 07:30 PM   #72
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,128
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
But that's exactly what happens, on a regular basis.
Please present evidence of this.

Quote:
What other corroborating evidence can there even be in such a case? Lies told outside the interview aren't evidence of a crime, because lying isn't generally illegal. Only a lie during an interview is illegal. FBI statements are the only evidence of what happened in the interview, so they are the totality of the evidence.
You claim this is done. I've seen no evidence that this is true. Please present a case where a person was charged with lying when the only evidence was the FBI accusation.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 08:01 PM   #73
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 47,230
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
You claim this is done. I've seen no evidence that this is true. Please present a case where a person was charged with lying when the only evidence was the FBI accusation.
What other evidence do you think is even possible? Certainly the FBI had no other evidence against Flynn when they charged him, and it's circular reasoning to take his plea as evidence.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 08:05 PM   #74
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,733
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
But that's exactly what happens, on a regular basis.

What other corroborating evidence can there even be in such a case? Lies told outside the interview aren't evidence of a crime, because lying isn't generally illegal. Only a lie during an interview is illegal. FBI statements are the only evidence of what happened in the interview, so they are the totality of the evidence.
We're not talking theoreticals here. In this particular case, Flynn stood up in federal court and confessed to the lies he was accused of. You might claim his lies didn't matter or shouldn't matter, but you can't claim he didn't lie.

Last edited by Bob001; 7th May 2020 at 08:07 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 08:07 PM   #75
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 11,594
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Seems to me his plea deal was hardly an example of overreach.
I don't really know all the ins and outs and am not going to the mat saying Flynn was an innocent victim. But, a longstanding principle in U.S. justice is that we'd rather see the guilty go free than improperly convict someone. I know he pleaded guilty. If that was under duress, the circumstances bear looking at.
Minoosh is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 08:22 PM   #76
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,733
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't really know all the ins and outs and am not going to the mat saying Flynn was an innocent victim. But, a longstanding principle in U.S. justice is that we'd rather see the guilty go free than improperly convict someone. I know he pleaded guilty. If that was under duress, the circumstances bear looking at.
The "duress" in plea deals is usually "We've got the goods on you 100 percent. Look at it yourself. If you go to trial you'll lose. If you help us we'll help you." Nobody has to take a deal. He could have gone to court and made the case that he was coerced, he was tricked, he was threatened, he never lied, he was scared, etc., etc. (I note that it might be harder for a three-star general and ex-director of defense intelligence to make that case than the average schlub.) But he didn't do that.

Here's an alternative scenario: The feds could have thrown the book at him, he could have gone to trial on a dozen or so charges, the jury could have split the difference like Manafort and convicted on half, and he could have gone away for years. Too bad he didn't turn down the deal.

Last edited by Bob001; 7th May 2020 at 08:35 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 08:42 PM   #77
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 42,711
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I guarantee you that the case will never be picked up again, no matter who becomes president. If you think otherwise, it's because you haven't actually paid attention to the case, and don't actually understand why it was dropped.
No. That's because you haven't actually paid attention to the case, and don't actually understand why it was dropped.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 08:45 PM   #78
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 42,711
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't really know all the ins and outs and am not going to the mat saying Flynn was an innocent victim. But, a longstanding principle in U.S. justice is that we'd rather see the guilty go free than improperly convict someone. I know he pleaded guilty. If that was under duress, the circumstances bear looking at.
It was a plea deal to a lesser crime rather than be convicted for a worse crime.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 09:38 PM   #79
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 13,160
Only biased idiots would think that there was any coercion when it comes to Flynn lying to the FBI.

If your spouse asks you if you cheated on them and you say "no", and then they present you with evidence that you cheated your excuse can't be:
"Honey, I only lied because I didn't think you knew the truth!"

Flynn is a treacherous criminal in the pay of Turkey and it the Military should court-martial him.
__________________
Prediction
https://xkcd.com/2370/
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2020, 10:00 PM   #80
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,443
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
It was a plea deal to a lesser crime rather than be convicted for a worse crime.
And since he was never charged with the worse crime, if the plea deal falls through because the DoJ drops the charges on the lesser crime, that means jeopardy can only be attached to the lesser crime (its not possible to attach jeopardy to a crime that hasn't been charged). That leaves him wide open to being charged for the worse crime. Once the corruption is rooted out from the DoJ, and Trump is gone-burger, the new Government is going to have access to all the stuff that has been hidden from view. I would not rule out orange jump suits in the future of some current and former members of the administration.
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 7th May 2020 at 10:26 PM.
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:13 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.