Mueller Investigation pt4 - Page 9

Cain · 4th December 2018, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by Pterodactyl

I'm just gonna leave this here:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Only a 128 views? WTF?!

Norman Alexander · 4th December 2018, 09:45 PM

Originally Posted by Cain

Only a 128 views? WTF?!

That many? Amazing indeed.

The Great Zaganza · 4th December 2018, 10:15 PM

"The mob takes the Fifth Amendment" ... " If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" -Trump

Roger Stone invokes Fifth Amendment in Senate Russia probe:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/04/p...ent/index.html

PhantomWolf · 4th December 2018, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by Tero

Stone will be dealt with in some manner. He got nothing last time
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Stone
Maybe rehab for conspiracy theorists?

I think you have the wrong Stone

Cabbage · 4th December 2018, 10:29 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

I think you have the wrong Stone

Leave no Stone unturned.

smartcooky · 5th December 2018, 12:02 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

I guess Mueller is a Black Flag fan!

Flynn is going to get on the low end of a range that called for 0 to 6 months for "substantial assistance" which otherwise would have called for .... zero months.

lolz.

Lolz alright. If you stopped for a moment to think about why that is, before smart-mouthing off, you be able to work out for yourself, er, why that is. Mueller has gone to great lengths to say how useful and how timely Flynn's co-operation has been.

Pro-tip: If you think Mueller is talking to the judge when he says all this stuff, you're looking in the wrong place.

Stacyhs · 5th December 2018, 12:38 AM

Originally Posted by Pterodactyl

I'm just gonna leave this here:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

At least they got the name of their group right. I just took a look at their website. I was not surprised by what I saw. These ladies have drunk the Kool Aid completely.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 02:42 AM

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...68919929970692

Quote:

Trump has been urging his associates to have "guts" and not cooperate in the Russia probe. But Mueller sent a clear message tonight to current/future witnesses: testify honestly and completely, and you could be spared prison time.

Article embedded in tweet.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 03:09 AM

But, yeah, basically as we expected: Flynn has been meeting with Mueller a lot, and has given him a lot of information he considers useful. Given the extent of the information, Mueller is searching for leniency to send a signal out to the Roger Stones of this world.

If people in Trump's orbit are sensible and intelligent they'll look at the treatment of Flynn by Mueller and look at the treatment of Cohen by Trump and decide that they're better off cooperating than they are in being "loyal" and hoping for a pardon. That's quite a big "if", though.

WilliamSeger · 5th December 2018, 03:22 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

I guess Mueller is a Black Flag fan!

Flynn is going to get on the low end of a range that called for 0 to 6 months for "substantial assistance" which otherwise would have called for .... zero months.

lolz.

Your keen legal mind seems to have missed a point: The reason Flynn is only looking at 6 months tops, regardless of Mueller's recommendation, is because that's what the plea deal was: only one offense and assign it the least serious category for sentencing purposes.

Flynn gave Mueller "substantial assistance" (apparently including emails and texts) in his investigation of "coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign" and two other cases. It seems you're trying very hard to not understand what that means for anyone holding "no collusion" shares on predictit.org.

lolz.

Cain · 5th December 2018, 03:26 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

That many? Amazing indeed.

Stop trolling me, gun-grabber.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 05:22 AM

Renato Mariotti thread on what he believes the significance of the Flynn sentencing memo is

Firestone · 5th December 2018, 06:16 AM

Serious question:

Parts of the Mueller memo on Flynn are blacked out.
Is that only for the public, or does even the judge not get to read the full text?

I Am The Scum · 5th December 2018, 06:18 AM

Originally Posted by Firestone

Serious question:

Parts of the Mueller memo on Flynn are blacked out.
Is that only for the public, or does even the judge not get to read the full text?

The judge definitely gets to read it. It'd be difficult to sign off on it, otherwise.

Belz... · 5th December 2018, 06:18 AM

Originally Posted by Cain

Only a 128 views? WTF?!

Quick! Find something to dismiss it with!

Firestone · 5th December 2018, 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

The judge definitely gets to read it. It'd be difficult to sign off on it, otherwise.

Thanks, makes a lot of sense.

Beelzebuddy · 5th December 2018, 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by Firestone

Serious question:

Parts of the Mueller memo on Flynn are blacked out.
Is that only for the public, or does even the judge not get to read the full text?

The judge gets to read the full text. More importantly, the full text is there and out of Mueller's hands, even if Trump fires him and burns the rest tomorrow, and until then serves as a big scary block of maybe-they-got-me for the unindicted conspirators.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...68919929970692

Article embedded in tweet.

HI! Thanks for the link to the "tweet"!

You don't really say why anyone should waste their time, so I suspect if you will have no problem whatsoever if I point out that no one should bother because your article does not even mention that the range is 0-6 months!

acbytesla · 5th December 2018, 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger

Your keen legal mind seems to have missed a point: The reason Flynn is only looking at 6 months tops, regardless of Mueller's recommendation, is because that's what the plea deal was: only one offense and assign it the least serious category for sentencing purposes.

Flynn gave Mueller "substantial assistance" (apparently including emails and texts) in his investigation of "coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign" and two other cases. It seems you're trying very hard to not understand what that means for anyone holding "no collusion" shares on predictit.org.

lolz.

IMV, what General Flynn did was despicable. Especially when you consider he was career US military. I'm guessing what he provided was particularly helpful otherwise Mueller wouldn't have given him such a sweetheart deal.

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

HI! Thanks for the link to the "tweet"!

You don't really say why anyone should waste their time, so I suspect if you will have no problem whatsoever if I point out that no one should bother because your article does not even mention that the range is 0-6 months!

It's only 0-6 months because that's what Mueller let it be in the plea bargain. This has been explained to you ad nauseum. By continuing to ignore this extremely blatant fact you've only shown that you have absolutely no rebuttal to put forth.

The 0-6 ratio is only important to you.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 10:24 AM

One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador.

"Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony...

"curious" indeed.

Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time.

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador.

"Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony...

"curious" indeed.

Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time.

Evidence. Do you have any evidence he DIDN'T investigate it?

You are making a claim that he hasn't. Back it up or retract it.

Jk, you won't do either

acbytesla · 5th December 2018, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador.

"Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony...

"curious" indeed.

Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time.

What makes you think he hasn't?

Ninja'd by the Plague..

I think it's absurd to think Mueller hasn't. My guess is Mueller and Comey's investigation of Flynn was more thorough than any exam performed by the best proctologist. Keep in mind that Flynn's actions that led to the wider Russia investigation.

That we don't know is simply a demonstration of Mueller's professionalism.

timhau · 5th December 2018, 10:54 AM

"Curious" as to why sensible people don't use the ignore function on trolls.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 5th December 2018, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo [...]

No it doesn't. It says that the article was published days before Flynn's first interview, and that other members of Trump's transition team had made public statements on the same subject.

Quote:

The first series of false statements occurred during an interview with the FBI on January 24, 2017. At the time of the interview, the FBI had an open investigation into the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, including the nature of any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald J. Trump. Days prior to the FBI’s interview of the defendant, the
Washington Post
had published a story alleging that he had spoken with Russia’s ambassador to the United States on December 29, 2016, the day the United States announced sanctions and other measures against Russia in response to that government’s actions intended to interfere with the 2016 election (collectively, “sanctions”).
See
David Ignatius,
Why did Obama Dawdle on Russia’s hacking?
,

W
ASH
.

P
OST
(Jan. 12, 2017). The Post
story queried whether the defendant’s actions violated the Logan Act, which prohibits U.S. citizens from corresponding with a foreign government with the intent to influence the conduct of that foreign government regarding disputes with the United States.
See
18 U.S.C. § 953. Subsequent to the publication of the
Case 1:17-cr-00232-EGS Document 46 Filed 12/04/18 Page 2 of 7

-3-
Post
article and prior to the defendant’s FBI interview, members of President-Elect Trump’s transition team publicly stated that they had spoken to the defendant, and that he denied speaking to the Russian ambassador about the sanctions.
See, e.g.
,
Face the Nation transcript January 15, 2017: Pence, Manchin, Gingrich
,

CBS

N
EWS
(Jan. 15, 2017). When the FBI interviewed the defendant on January 24 about his interactions with the Russian ambassador, the defendant falsely stated that he did not ask the Russian ambassador to refrain from escalating the situation in response to the sanctions, and falsely disclaimed any memory of his subsequent conversation with the ambassador in which the ambassador stated that Russia had acceded to the defendant’s request.
See
SOF at ¶ 3. In addition, the defendant made false statements to the FBI about his prior interactions with the Russian government in December 2016 concerning a pending United Nations Security Council resolution.
See id.
at ¶ 4. The defendant’s false statements to the FBI about (i) his contacts with a Russian government emissary, (ii) the requests he conveyed to the Russian government through that emissary, and (iii) Russia’s response to those requests, were material to the FBI’s investigation into the nature of any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.

Sorry, but I can't be arsed to fix the formatting. Here's the memo

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by timhau

snip

Golly, did you have some information that it was the subject of an investigation? Because one would have thought that it would have been mentioned in the sentencing report, because Flynn was in fact the victim of that felony.

I assume given your post that you have a layer of substantive evidence that has thus far eluded us.

As such regale us with the facts, regale away!

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

What makes you think he hasn't?

Ninja'd by the Plague..

I think it's absurd to think Mueller hasn't. My guess is Mueller and Comey's investigation of Flynn was more thorough than any exam performed by the best proctologist. Keep in mind that Flynn's actions that led to the wider Russia investigation.

That we don't know is simply a demonstration of Mueller's professionalism.

TBD is just repeating Trump's debunked line of "why isn't he investigating the other side?!?!"

Which the obvious answer is, "He's investigating anything in relation to the Russia investigation, no matter who that happens to be or their political affiliation."

Mueller wasn't tasked with Hillary's emails. Why would he investigate them?

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Sorry, but I can't be arsed to fix the formatting.

Deal. No arsing Squeegee. Check

plague311 · 5th December 2018, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by timhau

"Curious" as to why sensible people don't use the ignore function on trolls.

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Golly, did you have some information that it was the subject of an investigation? Because one would have thought that it would have been mentioned in the sentencing report, because Flynn was in fact the victim of that felony.

I assume given your post that you have a layer of substantive evidence that has thus far eluded us.

As such regale us with the facts, regale away!

LoL wut?

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 11:05 AM

Hmm, the in-curiosity of who in the Obama administration leaked the surveillance tapes to WaPo.

I wonder why Mueller graced the sentencing memo with a reference to waPo's article, which was based on a leak, without mentioning it was leaked....

Hmmm.

I Am The Scum · 5th December 2018, 11:07 AM

We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics.

Wait, is that supposed to be a bad thing? Given that we are talking about the sentencing recommendation?

Walk us through your thought process.

I Am The Scum · 5th December 2018, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Wait, is that supposed to be a bad thing?

Given that you have not acknowledged that Flynn committed a crime, and you even went so far as to misrepresent your own sources to enhance your denial, yeah, that's a bad thing.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

Given that you have not acknowledged that Flynn committed a crime, and you even went so far as to misrepresent your own sources to enhance your denial, yeah, that's a bad thing.

Oh dear, whether or not I have acknowledged that it was a crime (it wasn't) surely your post could not possibly have meant that... lets break it down:

"Why are you pulling me over for running a red light" hmmm I am the Scum that statement right there assumes that a crime was indeed committed.

Perhaps you want to reignite those engines and start again (and also leave the false claims about misrepresenting sources in the trash where it belongs, not only because it is false, but also because has **** all to do with your claim)

Waiting with anticipation!

Garrette · 5th December 2018, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics.

Not quite:

We are now in the "Why are you hassling me for potentially selling out the country when there are people who might have illegally let you know that I am potentially selling out the country?" level of apologetics.

I Am The Scum · 5th December 2018, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Oh dear, whether or not I have acknowledged that it was a crime (it wasn't) surely your post could not possibly have meant that... lets break it down:

Yikes. We have regressed to "Flynn pleaded guilty to an activity that is not actually illegal" apologetics. This is getting rough.

The Big Dog · 5th December 2018, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

Yikes. We have regressed to "Flynn pleaded guilty to an activity that is not actually illegal" apologetics. This is getting rough.

Ah, not going to defend your earlier silly statement? Good idea.

Now we are at a new position, and we have regressed to "deliberately misrepresenting my position" apologetics.

Super.

Beelzebuddy · 5th December 2018, 11:30 AM

You can't regress back to a level you never left.

smartcooky · 5th December 2018, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador.

"Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony...

"curious" indeed.

Your obvious whataboutism is obvious

smartcooky · 5th December 2018, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Hmm, the in-curiosity of who in the Obama administration leaked the surveillance tapes to WaPo.

I wonder why Mueller graced the sentencing memo with a reference to waPo's article, which was based on a leak, without mentioning it was leaked....

Hmmm.

Maybe he did, and its been redacted.

smartcooky · 5th December 2018, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

Ah, not going to defend your earlier silly statement? Good idea.

Now we are at a new position, and we have regressed to "deliberately misrepresenting my position" apologetics.

Super.

Its hard not to misrepresent your position when you either change it willy-nilly or don't represent it at all. Your continual whataboutism makes it near impossible, but I guess that's the idea.

4th December 2018, 09:45 PM	#322
Norman Alexander Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 5,196	Originally Posted by Cain Only a 128 views? WTF?! That many? Amazing indeed.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

4th December 2018, 10:15 PM	#323
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 7,966	"The mob takes the Fifth Amendment" ... " If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" -Trump Roger Stone invokes Fifth Amendment in Senate Russia probe: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/04/p...ent/index.html
	__________________ Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.

4th December 2018, 10:17 PM	#324
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 18,271	Originally Posted by Tero Stone will be dealt with in some manner. He got nothing last time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Stone Maybe rehab for conspiracy theorists? I think you have the wrong Stone
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

4th December 2018, 10:29 PM	#325
Cabbage Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,047	Originally Posted by PhantomWolf I think you have the wrong Stone Leave no Stone unturned.
Cabbage Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,047

5th December 2018, 12:02 AM	#326
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 11,382	Originally Posted by The Big Dog I guess Mueller is a Black Flag fan! Flynn is going to get on the low end of a range that called for 0 to 6 months for "substantial assistance" which otherwise would have called for .... zero months. lolz. Lolz alright. If you stopped for a moment to think about why that is, before smart-mouthing off, you be able to work out for yourself, er, why that is. Mueller has gone to great lengths to say how useful and how timely Flynn's co-operation has been. Pro-tip: If you think Mueller is talking to the judge when he says all this stuff, you're looking in the wrong place.
	__________________ #THEYAREUS The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!

5th December 2018, 02:42 AM	#328
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...68919929970692 Quote: Trump has been urging his associates to have "guts" and not cooperate in the Russia probe. But Mueller sent a clear message tonight to current/future witnesses: testify honestly and completely, and you could be spared prison time. Article embedded in tweet.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

5th December 2018, 03:09 AM	#329
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	But, yeah, basically as we expected: Flynn has been meeting with Mueller a lot, and has given him a lot of information he considers useful. Given the extent of the information, Mueller is searching for leniency to send a signal out to the Roger Stones of this world. If people in Trump's orbit are sensible and intelligent they'll look at the treatment of Flynn by Mueller and look at the treatment of Cohen by Trump and decide that they're better off cooperating than they are in being "loyal" and hoping for a pardon. That's quite a big "if", though.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

5th December 2018, 03:22 AM	#330
WilliamSeger Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 4,535	Originally Posted by The Big Dog I guess Mueller is a Black Flag fan! Flynn is going to get on the low end of a range that called for 0 to 6 months for "substantial assistance" which otherwise would have called for .... zero months. lolz. Your keen legal mind seems to have missed a point: The reason Flynn is only looking at 6 months tops, regardless of Mueller's recommendation, is because that's what the plea deal was: only one offense and assign it the least serious category for sentencing purposes. Flynn gave Mueller "substantial assistance" (apparently including emails and texts) in his investigation of "coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign" and two other cases. It seems you're trying very hard to not understand what that means for anyone holding "no collusion" shares on predictit.org. lolz.
	__________________ ^{"We're done! We're done! GET OUT!"}

5th December 2018, 03:26 AM	#331
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 12,785	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander That many? Amazing indeed. Stop trolling me, gun-grabber.
	__________________ April 13th, 2018: Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.

5th December 2018, 05:22 AM	#332
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	Renato Mariotti thread on what he believes the significance of the Flynn sentencing memo is
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

5th December 2018, 06:16 AM	#333
Firestone Proud Award Award recipient Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,068	Serious question: Parts of the Mueller memo on Flynn are blacked out. Is that only for the public, or does even the judge not get to read the full text?
	__________________ The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan

5th December 2018, 06:18 AM	#334
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 3,813	Originally Posted by Firestone Serious question: Parts of the Mueller memo on Flynn are blacked out. Is that only for the public, or does even the judge not get to read the full text? The judge definitely gets to read it. It'd be difficult to sign off on it, otherwise.

5th December 2018, 06:18 AM	#335
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 81,515	Originally Posted by Cain Only a 128 views? WTF?! Quick! Find something to dismiss it with!
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

5th December 2018, 06:46 AM	#336
Firestone Proud Award Award recipient Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,068	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum The judge definitely gets to read it. It'd be difficult to sign off on it, otherwise. Thanks, makes a lot of sense.
	__________________ The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan

5th December 2018, 06:46 AM	#337
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 6,722	Originally Posted by Firestone Serious question: Parts of the Mueller memo on Flynn are blacked out. Is that only for the public, or does even the judge not get to read the full text? The judge gets to read the full text. More importantly, the full text is there and out of Mueller's hands, even if Trump fires him and burns the rest tomorrow, and until then serves as a big scary block of maybe-they-got-me for the unindicted conspirators.
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 6,722

5th December 2018, 06:50 AM	#338
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/...68919929970692 Article embedded in tweet. HI! Thanks for the link to the "tweet"! You don't really say why anyone should waste their time, so I suspect if you will have no problem whatsoever if I point out that no one should bother because your article does not even mention that the range is 0-6 months!
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 09:38 AM	#339
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 21,317	Originally Posted by WilliamSeger Your keen legal mind seems to have missed a point: The reason Flynn is only looking at 6 months tops, regardless of Mueller's recommendation, is because that's what the plea deal was: only one offense and assign it the least serious category for sentencing purposes. Flynn gave Mueller "substantial assistance" (apparently including emails and texts) in his investigation of "coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign" and two other cases. It seems you're trying very hard to not understand what that means for anyone holding "no collusion" shares on predictit.org. lolz. IMV, what General Flynn did was despicable. Especially when you consider he was career US military. I'm guessing what he provided was particularly helpful otherwise Mueller wouldn't have given him such a sweetheart deal.
	__________________ “ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ” ― David Hume

5th December 2018, 09:50 AM	#340
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by The Big Dog HI! Thanks for the link to the "tweet"! You don't really say why anyone should waste their time, so I suspect if you will have no problem whatsoever if I point out that no one should bother because your article does not even mention that the range is 0-6 months! It's only 0-6 months because that's what Mueller let it be in the plea bargain. This has been explained to you ad nauseum. By continuing to ignore this extremely blatant fact you've only shown that you have absolutely no rebuttal to put forth. The 0-6 ratio is only important to you.
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 10:24 AM	#341
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador. "Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony... "curious" indeed. Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 10:40 AM	#342
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by The Big Dog One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador. "Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony... "curious" indeed. Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time. Evidence. Do you have any evidence he DIDN'T investigate it? You are making a claim that he hasn't. Back it up or retract it. Jk, you won't do either
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 10:48 AM	#343
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 21,317	Originally Posted by The Big Dog One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo which in turn was based on the illegal leak of the Flynn call to the Russian Ambassador. "Curious" that Mueller has not investigated that felony... "curious" indeed. Might explain another reason why Bobby recommended zero jail time. What makes you think he hasn't? Ninja'd by the Plague.. I think it's absurd to think Mueller hasn't. My guess is Mueller and Comey's investigation of Flynn was more thorough than any exam performed by the best proctologist. Keep in mind that Flynn's actions that led to the wider Russia investigation. That we don't know is simply a demonstration of Mueller's professionalism.
	__________________ “ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ” ― David Hume Last edited by acbytesla; 5th December 2018 at 10:58 AM.

5th December 2018, 10:54 AM	#344
timhau NWO Litter Technician Join Date: May 2004 Location: Looks like Finland. Smells like Finland. Quacks like Finland. Where the hell am I? Posts: 13,114	"Curious" as to why sensible people don't use the ignore function on trolls.
	__________________ When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

5th December 2018, 10:59 AM	#345
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 24,149	Originally Posted by The Big Dog One thing that is notable about the Mueller document is that it mentions that the FBI began investigating Flynn based on an article in the WaPo [...] No it doesn't. It says that the article was published days before Flynn's first interview, and that other members of Trump's transition team had made public statements on the same subject. Quote: The first series of false statements occurred during an interview with the FBI on January 24, 2017. At the time of the interview, the FBI had an open investigation into the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, including the nature of any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald J. Trump. Days prior to the FBI’s interview of the defendant, the Washington Post had published a story alleging that he had spoken with Russia’s ambassador to the United States on December 29, 2016, the day the United States announced sanctions and other measures against Russia in response to that government’s actions intended to interfere with the 2016 election (collectively, “sanctions”). See David Ignatius, Why did Obama Dawdle on Russia’s hacking? , W ASH . P OST (Jan. 12, 2017). The Post story queried whether the defendant’s actions violated the Logan Act, which prohibits U.S. citizens from corresponding with a foreign government with the intent to influence the conduct of that foreign government regarding disputes with the United States. See 18 U.S.C. § 953. Subsequent to the publication of the Case 1:17-cr-00232-EGS Document 46 Filed 12/04/18 Page 2 of 7 -3- Post article and prior to the defendant’s FBI interview, members of President-Elect Trump’s transition team publicly stated that they had spoken to the defendant, and that he denied speaking to the Russian ambassador about the sanctions. See, e.g. , Face the Nation transcript January 15, 2017: Pence, Manchin, Gingrich , CBS N EWS (Jan. 15, 2017). When the FBI interviewed the defendant on January 24 about his interactions with the Russian ambassador, the defendant falsely stated that he did not ask the Russian ambassador to refrain from escalating the situation in response to the sanctions, and falsely disclaimed any memory of his subsequent conversation with the ambassador in which the ambassador stated that Russia had acceded to the defendant’s request. See SOF at ¶ 3. In addition, the defendant made false statements to the FBI about his prior interactions with the Russian government in December 2016 concerning a pending United Nations Security Council resolution. See id. at ¶ 4. The defendant’s false statements to the FBI about (i) his contacts with a Russian government emissary, (ii) the requests he conveyed to the Russian government through that emissary, and (iii) Russia’s response to those requests, were material to the FBI’s investigation into the nature of any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign. Sorry, but I can't be arsed to fix the formatting. Here's the memo
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

5th December 2018, 11:00 AM	#346
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by timhau snip Golly, did you have some information that it was the subject of an investigation? Because one would have thought that it would have been mentioned in the sentencing report, because Flynn was in fact the victim of that felony. I assume given your post that you have a layer of substantive evidence that has thus far eluded us. As such regale us with the facts, regale away!
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 11:02 AM	#347
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by acbytesla What makes you think he hasn't? Ninja'd by the Plague.. I think it's absurd to think Mueller hasn't. My guess is Mueller and Comey's investigation of Flynn was more thorough than any exam performed by the best proctologist. Keep in mind that Flynn's actions that led to the wider Russia investigation. That we don't know is simply a demonstration of Mueller's professionalism. TBD is just repeating Trump's debunked line of "why isn't he investigating the other side?!?!" Which the obvious answer is, "He's investigating anything in relation to the Russia investigation, no matter who that happens to be or their political affiliation." Mueller wasn't tasked with Hillary's emails. Why would he investigate them? Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim Sorry, but I can't be arsed to fix the formatting. Deal. No arsing Squeegee. Check
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 11:03 AM	#348
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 5,017	Originally Posted by timhau "Curious" as to why sensible people don't use the ignore function on trolls. Originally Posted by The Big Dog Golly, did you have some information that it was the subject of an investigation? Because one would have thought that it would have been mentioned in the sentencing report, because Flynn was in fact the victim of that felony. I assume given your post that you have a layer of substantive evidence that has thus far eluded us. As such regale us with the facts, regale away! LoL wut?
	__________________ "All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2018, 11:05 AM	#349
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Hmm, the in-curiosity of who in the Obama administration leaked the surveillance tapes to WaPo. I wonder why Mueller graced the sentencing memo with a reference to waPo's article, which was based on a leak, without mentioning it was leaked.... Hmmm.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Last edited by The Big Dog; 5th December 2018 at 11:09 AM.

5th December 2018, 11:07 AM	#350
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 3,813	We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics.

5th December 2018, 11:11 AM	#351
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics. Wait, is that supposed to be a bad thing? Given that we are talking about the sentencing recommendation? Walk us through your thought process.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 11:15 AM	#352
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 3,813	Originally Posted by The Big Dog Wait, is that supposed to be a bad thing? Given that you have not acknowledged that Flynn committed a crime, and you even went so far as to misrepresent your own sources to enhance your denial, yeah, that's a bad thing.

5th December 2018, 11:20 AM	#353
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum Given that you have not acknowledged that Flynn committed a crime, and you even went so far as to misrepresent your own sources to enhance your denial, yeah, that's a bad thing. Oh dear, whether or not I have acknowledged that it was a crime (it wasn't) surely your post could not possibly have meant that... lets break it down: "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light" hmmm I am the Scum that statement right there assumes that a crime was indeed committed. Perhaps you want to reignite those engines and start again (and also leave the false claims about misrepresenting sources in the trash where it belongs, not only because it is false, but also because has **** all to do with your claim) Waiting with anticipation!
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 11:21 AM	#354
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 14,762	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum We are now in the "Why are you pulling me over for running a red light when there are murderers and rapists roaming the streets?" level of apologetics. Not quite: We are now in the "Why are you hassling me for potentially selling out the country when there are people who might have illegally let you know that I am potentially selling out the country?" level of apologetics.
	__________________ My kids still love me.

5th December 2018, 11:22 AM	#355
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 3,813	Originally Posted by The Big Dog Oh dear, whether or not I have acknowledged that it was a crime (it wasn't) surely your post could not possibly have meant that... lets break it down: Yikes. We have regressed to "Flynn pleaded guilty to an activity that is not actually illegal" apologetics. This is getting rough.

5th December 2018, 11:27 AM	#356
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum Yikes. We have regressed to "Flynn pleaded guilty to an activity that is not actually illegal" apologetics. This is getting rough. Ah, not going to defend your earlier silly statement? Good idea. Now we are at a new position, and we have regressed to "deliberately misrepresenting my position" apologetics. Super.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

5th December 2018, 11:30 AM	#357
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 6,722	You can't regress back to a level you never left.
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 6,722