Keep burying your head in the sand, SkyzykS. You’re a smart guy; I’m amazed you buy this administration’s BS. Every single day it’s something new. Every single day.
1 Like
I totally get it… These guys had to sit through Obama for 8yrs. Its like when you don’t get laid in a month or 2 the fat chick at bar starts to look good. I totally get it theyve been starved. I blame the far right if Jeb Bush was prez theyd actually be getting shit done. But guys when you smell pee theres prolly pee…Russian pee :\
Looks like this farce with Trump could soon be over. What a nightmare of a joke this all was. Or is. We’ll see.
Sure it does, it’s setting the news cycle up to reflect as positively as it can if/when Flynn decides to flip.[quote=“SkyzykS, post:239, topic:226860”]
Completely not a fucking story. Definitely sensational clickbait.
[/quote]
A public statement from Flynn’s lawyer is clickbait?
1 Like
That makes no sense. Thanks.
1 Like
I’m not saying that there isn’t any merit to the investigation, just that the particular document is not what it was claimed to be. And that headline is sensationalized click bait.
If he were requesting immunity in exchange for testimony it would mean that he was going to divulge information that would leave him open to fair prosecution, ei- he would be divulging his own part in a criminal conspiracy, and it would be Fair prosecution. What he is doing is participating in a fact finding investigation- which can be used against him later regardless of whether or not he divulges any criminal act.
He could be called back before congress basically on a whim to testify about what he said the last time, regardless of content and re-examined infinitely. After so many iterations of the same thing, any differences, mis-wordings or simple misunderstanding- they tabulate those and re-eamine based on difference between your original testimony and your umpteenth. That is unfair prosecution and something that guys like Gowdy and Chaffetz live for.
Its the ultimate Gotcha Game.
Yes. Saying that he is requesting immunity when that is clearly not what it was is sensationalized clickbait.
Well, Trump doesn’t seem to think it’s just sensational clickbait, otherwise he would unleash the all-powerful Twitter.
It seems that cough someone cough is nervous…
1 Like
What word or phrase would you use, other than immunity, to describe an agreement to tell your side of the story without legal repercussion?
1 Like
Look, as far as I’m concerned if there were some legal, decent, proper way of getting rid of Trump and replacing him with somebody sane it could only be a good thing for your country and the world, but I think this campaign of innuendo, misinformation and conspiracy theory is silly at best and thoroughly iniquitous at worst.
He’s not asking for that in that letter
He’s just being dumb again. Especially if he colluded with Flynn and foreign agents to sway the election.
To avoid being prosecuted based on your own testimony, you plead the 5th, and say absolutely nothing by having your attorney speak on your behalf. By offering no testimony, there is nothing to cross examine, aand your attorney can’t be cross examined, as he is only representative of you, not the actual defendant.
The letter is actually an expressed written statement of cooperation. He’s willing to cooperate and enter testimony for the record. If there was something to hide, his attorney could stonewall this and have him take the 5th. He’s just asking not to get tooled around for the next 5 years on re-examinations. That you guys see something nefarious based on that is actually a little silly.
The letter is a response to the reports that Flynn will testify in exchange for immunity. The inference is that anyone who seeks immunity in exchange for giving up damning information is admitting to wrongdoing. Flynn’s lawyer - rightly - is trying to counter that public inference by saying my client is a decorated hero and is not guilty of anything and this whole investigation is a bunch of hooey but I suppose we need to consider getting “assurances” - read, immunity - to make sure my client is protected from this overreach.
In other words, the lawyer is making sure it’s publicly clear they aren’t conceding Flynn admits to any wrongdoing by seeking immunity.
It isn’t clickbait, nor is pointing out that the letter seems to affirm a potential immunity deal clickbait.
"Michael Flynn offers to testify in exchange for immunity "
The title is click bait. You used the words “seems to” because it’s uncertain what he’s asking for
I guess we just have entirely different reads on it.
And really, “Seems To affirm Potential” is about as slippery a statement as anybody could make.
At some point it has to come down to whether it is or is not. As it stands, at least in my eyes it is not a request for immunity.
That’s because no lawyer worth his salt would formally offer to make a deal with the government through a public statement, Einstein.
1 Like
Then why are people stating it as fact he’s asking for immunity based on his public statement?
See my response to Raj. It’s unclear if any offer has been accepted, and no public statement is going to serve as formal negotiation with the government - in other words, no public statement issued by a lawyer is going to say “hey, yes everyone, we totally are trying to get immunity for Flynn in exchange for his testimony, even though he totally didn’t do anything wrong. What day you, government, to our deal?”
The letter won’t be so explicit, nor should it be, but it does seem to affirm that they’re offering a deal. You wouldn’t float this public statement if there wasnt an of a deal and discussion of it.
1 Like
Because an independent source reported that Flynn was seeking such a deal, and the letter was issued to the public in response to that public reporting.