Flynn Pleads Guilty

LOST said:

JF,

"Counsel"

Have you ever read Scalia's dissent in the case upholding the Special Prosecutor law?

As I recall one of the things he said is that in a usual criminal investigation you start with a crime and look for the perpetrator. A Special Prosecutor starts with an alleged perpetrator and looks for the crime. Further he doesn't stop until he finds the crime and when he does he puts himself out of a job.

Never read it, sounds like something he’d write. 

Forgive me my “council”. It seems like a Star Chamber- like setup to me so I maybe I was typing thinking about privy councils. Or maybe my lawyer typed it.

We finally agree!

nan said:


...
Van Jones is clueless.
...

Deleted.

nan said:

 I don't watch much mainsteam TV, but I heard that Rachel Maddow spent less than two minutes talking about net neutrality and 45 or more on Russia.  The networks probably don't want net neutrality, but anyway. . . .

This explains a lot about how you arrive at your opinions.

I do watch the program, and the "less than two minutes" claim is false. 

I know she has covered the issue numerous times. Watching that program might help a person's understanding of which companies "probably don't want net neutrality". 

And who told nan the "less than two minutes" lie. You probably shouldn't trust them, or repeat what they say without checking. 

dave23 said:

nan said:

 I don't watch much mainsteam TV, but I heard that Rachel Maddow spent less than two minutes talking about net neutrality and 45 or more on Russia.  The networks probably don't want net neutrality, but anyway. . . .

This explains a lot about how you arrive at your opinions.

NothingBurger = guilty plea to federal crime.

I'm sure you wanted Hillary locked up, right?

nan said:

GL2 said:

The irrepressible Van Jones...

“I spent about ten years of my life doing criminal justice work in Oakland,” Jones said on CNN’s AC360. “I‘m just going to make this as plain as possible to the CNN viewers: when one of the main home boys turns snitch, a bunch of people about to go to jail. That’s just how that works.”

“This is a huge deal, you cannot pretend it’s not,” he concluded. “One of your main homeboys just turned snitch — all y’all in trouble.”

Van Jones is clueless.

Flynn's Plea Is Another NothingBurger In Russiagate

dave23 said:

nan said:

 I don't watch much mainsteam TV, but I heard that Rachel Maddow spent less than two minutes talking about net neutrality and 45 or more on Russia.  The networks probably don't want net neutrality, but anyway. . . .

This explains a lot about how you arrive at your opinions.

Right, that's why I'm more informed than many of you.  It's not that mainstream news is "fake" but that it does not cover some topics and has a corporate slant on others.  LIke when Trump started bombing Syria and commentators were calling him Presidential and quoting Leonard Cohen.  It's like when the Democrats voted to give 80 billion to the military and there was little coverage.  It's like why they never ask how can we afford so much money going to the military.  And I doubt the coverage on net neutrality has been as extensive as the places I primarily look to for news.  The two minute comment referred to a single broadcast.  She spent way more time on this Flynn crap. Net neutrality is more important.

Holiday greetings, from Russia with love.

nan said:

dave23 said:

This explains a lot about how you arrive at your opinions.

Right, that's why I'm more informed than many of you.  

This, too, is instructive.

nan said:

dave23 said:

nan said:

 I don't watch much mainsteam TV, but I heard that Rachel Maddow spent less than two minutes talking about net neutrality and 45 or more on Russia.  The networks probably don't want net neutrality, but anyway. . . .

This explains a lot about how you arrive at your opinions.

Right, that's why I'm more informed than many of you.  It's not that mainstream news is "fake" but that it does not cover some topics and has a corporate slant on others.  LIke when Trump started bombing Syria and commentators were calling him Presidential and quoting Leonard Cohen.  It's like when the Democrats voted to give 80 billion to the military and there was little coverage.  It's like why they never ask how can we afford so much money going to the military.  And I doubt the coverage on net neutrality has been as extensive as the places I primarily look to for news.  The two minute comment referred to a single broadcast.  She spent way more time on this Flynn crap. Net neutrality is more important.

 You "heard" it was less than two minutes from the places you "primarily look for news." No surprise. 

send them all to jail,  trump comey Kushner Flynn and company .  Then they can all dress in orange jump suits and build trumps wall a brick at a time.

nan said:

....  It's like when the Democrats voted to give 80 billion to the military and there was little coverage.  It's like why they never ask how can we afford so much money going to the military.  ....

No politician will ever vote to reduce the defense budget for two reasons. First, their primary or general election opponent will label them soft on communism (Chinese and N. Korea in present case) and accuse them of wanting our nation to be weak. Secondly, defense contractors have made sure to put manufacturing plants in most states. A vote to lower defense spending will be responded to with the threat to close a defense plant in the legislators state or district.

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

nan said:

....  It's like when the Democrats voted to give 80 billion to the military and there was little coverage.  It's like why they never ask how can we afford so much money going to the military.  ....

No politician will ever vote to reduce the defense budget for two reasons. First, their primary or general election opponent will label them soft on communism (Chinese and N. Korea in present case) and accuse them of wanting our nation to be weak. Secondly, defense contractors have made sure to put manufacturing plants in most states. A vote to lower defense spending will be responded to with the threat to close a defense plant in the legislators state or district.

A few did vote against it and they have weapons manufacturing in their states.  When it comes to social welfare programs such as education or food for hungry children, many start asking "How can we afford that?" but when are they going to start asking how we can afford $80 billion extra for the military?  That was more than Trump even asked for.  It's time to wake up about this and stop supporting people who vote for this stuff. 

nan said:

When it comes to social welfare programs such as education or food for hungry children, many start asking "How can we afford that?" but when are they going to start asking how we can afford $80 billion extra for the military?  That was more than Trump even asked for.  It's time to wake up about this and stop supporting people who vote for this stuff. 

That's a smart issue to have debated in a Democratic primary.

It's not smart as an attempt to justify not supporting the Democratic Presidential candidate in 2016, or prospectively in 2020.

I'm not sure why the Flynn plea is considered nothing by so many of you.  They got him to plead to a crime that's a nothing, but there are other more serious allegations out there.  Flynn's alleged contacts with Turkey are very serious business, and he never disclosed that he was working with Turkey when he was vetted.  This is mobster kind of stuff:

Former White House national security adviser Mike Flynn and his son are alleged to have been offered as much as $15 million to forcibly remove from the US a Muslim cleric wanted by Turkey, The Wall Street Journal reports.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/politics/wsj-flynn-turkey/index.html

The Turkey thing sounds like more nuthin'. They were allegedly "offered" "as much as" (I love that phrase - i.e. offered from $1 to 15 million) 15 million dollars. So what? How is Flynn at fault if someone makes an offer to him?

Besides - I could give a rat's patoot about Flynn. Trump is the big game here - not Flynn.

ml1 said:

I'm not sure why the Flynn plea is considered nothing by so many of you.  They got him to plead to a crime that's a nothing, but there are other more serious allegations out there.  Flynn's alleged contacts with Turkey are very serious business, and he never disclosed that he was working with Turkey when he was vetted.  This is mobster kind of stuff:

Former White House national security adviser Mike Flynn and his son are alleged to have been offered as much as $15 million to forcibly remove from the US a Muslim cleric wanted by Turkey, The Wall Street Journal reports.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/politics/wsj-flynn-turkey/index.html

drummerboy said:

Besides - I could give a rat's patoot about Flynn. Trump is the big game here - not Flynn.

The only way to get to Trump is to get the underlings who know stuff to turn on him.

Flynn, Manafort, Gates, and Papadopoulos are potentially paving a path to Trump.

Flynn is the most promosing since he was very close to Trump and he is cooperating.  Manafort and Gates have lawyered up and Papadopoulos probably doesn't know much beyond what he did personally.

dave23 said:

drummerboy said:

Besides - I could give a rat's patoot about Flynn. Trump is the big game here - not Flynn.

The only way to get to Trump is to get the underlings who know stuff to turn on him.

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

dave23 said:

This explains a lot about how you arrive at your opinions.

Right, that's why I'm more informed than many of you.  

This, too, is instructive.

Perhaps we could convince nan to put out a newsletter from time to time soze we could get the real facts.

LOST said:

EricBurbank said:

All I am saying is that Mueller's main charge was to show Trump colluded with the Russians to influence the election.  As of now he has not shown it.  But if you listen to the far left and a lot of the media, everytime one of them are charged with something they jump up and down like it was proven.  Fynn's deal may lead to something but the others had nothing to do with collusion or the election.

What do you mean by the "far left"? To me that refers to Antifa or Trotskyite fringe groups. They couldn't care less about this matter.

By the "far left" he seems to mean Democrats.  

Ken Starr was asked to investigate the death of Vince Foster and Whitewater.  He ended up going after Clinton for lying about an affair with his intern.

So what's your point?

Klinker said:

LOST said:

EricBurbank said:

All I am saying is that Mueller's main charge was to show Trump colluded with the Russians to influence the election.  As of now he has not shown it.  But if you listen to the far left and a lot of the media, everytime one of them are charged with something they jump up and down like it was proven.  Fynn's deal may lead to something but the others had nothing to do with collusion or the election.

What do you mean by the "far left"? To me that refers to Antifa or Trotskyite fringe groups. They couldn't care less about this matter.

By the "far left" he seems to mean Democrats.  

I'm not saying he should be ignored by Mueller - I'm saying that we shouldn't waste any energy on his ultimate fate, 'cause who cares?

dave23 said:

drummerboy said:

Besides - I could give a rat's patoot about Flynn. Trump is the big game here - not Flynn.

The only way to get to Trump is to get the underlings who know stuff to turn on him.

Klinker said:

LOST said:

EricBurbank said:

All I am saying is that Mueller's main charge was to show Trump colluded with the Russians to influence the election.  As of now he has not shown it.  But if you listen to the far left and a lot of the media, everytime one of them are charged with something they jump up and down like it was proven.  Fynn's deal may lead to something but the others had nothing to do with collusion or the election.

What do you mean by the "far left"? To me that refers to Antifa or Trotskyite fringe groups. They couldn't care less about this matter.

By the "far left" he seems to mean Democrats.  

So who is the "near left"?

My impression is that EB doesn't much care for anyone to the left of the far right. He seems to be what they call a "Limbaugh Liberal".

Klinker said:

My impression is that EB doesn't much care for anyone to the left of the far right. He seems to be what they call a "Limbaugh Liberal".

Ironic for a guy on a gubmint pension.  It'll be sad, though, when access to health care gets trashed. Maybe that's what it will take for some people to wake up. 

Wow!! Personal attacks now. Seems I wrinkled some panties here.  All because I won't tow the party line or their narrative that we lost the election because of Russian Collusion (which all I have said was that it hasn't been proven yet).  Bottom line, we lost cause we had no message and a horrible candidate.

I admire your loyalty though.  Oh wait....that same kind of loyalty to a party is why we are where we are today.  When people can't think for themselves and believe only what they hear from the media or their own party we get stuck with a president Trump and a failed politician like Hillary.  I don't see how that makes me less of a democrat unless you are saying that in order to be a democrat I have to just believe what the party says is true and not listen to both sides and evaluate the facts.

And what does me collecting a pension for working 30 years for a company have to do with a dam thing?  Because it was a government and republicans are for smaller government?  Where were you when the town laid off a third of my staff and furloughed everyone for 12 days a year for a couple of years?  I don't remember you screaming to keep them on, you were thrilled that your taxes didn't go up that much more.  Guess that makes you a Limbaugh liberal. 

And while we are at it what does access to healthcare have to do with anything?

I don't get healthcare with my pension, and while I was working I was paying about 12k a year for my health care.  Yes it is cheaper than some pay through their job but that was the trade off for not making more money or getting bonuses as many in the private world get.

Or are you talking about my son who is a quadriplegic getting Medicaid?  If that is the case you assume wrong again since Medicaid hasn't paid one penny since his injury.  But if it makes you feel better thinking that goverment healthcare is paying for his bills knock yourself. 

Steve said:

Klinker said:

My impression is that EB doesn't much care for anyone to the left of the far right. He seems to be what they call a "Limbaugh Liberal".

Ironic for a guy on a gubmint pension.  It'll be sad, though, when access to health care gets trashed. Maybe that's what it will take for some people to wake up. 

EricBurbank said:

Wow!! Personal attacks now. Seems I wrinkled some panties here. 

Not so much an attack as an observation.  For someone who claims to be a Democrat you voice EXTREMELY conservative opinions.  Not to mention the occasional off color sexist outburst (see above).

The personal attack comment was more directed at Steve's post about me collecting a pension (and insinuating that my healthcare is paid for) and not yours.  I don't see my comments as EXTREMELY conservative, but I will admit they are not as liberal as they use to be.

Not to mention the occasional off color sexist outburst (see above).  

You are kidding right?  That is sexist?  There lies some of the issues with the party, way to sensitive and always worried about being so politically correct.

Klinker said:

EricBurbank said:

Wow!! Personal attacks now. Seems I wrinkled some panties here. 

Not so much an attack as an observation.  For someone who claims to be a Democrat you voice EXTREMELY conservative opinions.  Not to mention the occasional off color sexist outburst (see above).

How about when lifetime limits are reinstated?  People haven't a clue in the manner in which they benefit from the Affordable Care Act.  

I'd also suggest that your comments are pretty anti-government these days and you really haven't much of a clue about the legal system, which has resulted in a host of uninformed posts.  

Lastly, as for your guys being laid off/furloughed, I wasn't in Maplewood when it happened.  

P.S,  it's easy for a straight, white, Christian male to say that people are too sensitive.  

EricBurbank said:

Not to mention the occasional off color sexist outburst (see above).  

You are kidding right?  That is sexist?  There lies some of the issues with the party, way to sensitive and always worried about being so politically correct.

You said "Seems I wrinkled some panties here."

Panties being wrinkled provides either a sexually dominating (from you), or an emasculating (towards the receiver) image, as 'panties' is a feminine term.