• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Flynn Is Said to Have Talked to Russians About Sanctions Before Trump Took Office

apdst said:
Time will tell that General Flynn didn't break the law.
Click to expand...

As I said, the leaks will continue. Transcripts should be out in a week or 2 perhaps 3.
If innocent, good for him, if guilty then a severe jail sentence is required.
 
JANFU said:
As I said, the leaks will continue. Transcripts should be out in a week or 2 perhaps 3.
If innocent, good for him, if guilty then a severe jail sentence is required.
Click to expand...

You mean like what Pelosi and Kennedy got? You realize no one has ever been convicted of a Logan Act violation?

What was it the Libbos said about Clinton? No intent, no presedence, no crime?
 
Mac77 said:
Flynn broke no laws
Click to expand...

...he may have undermined the President of the United States and thus committed a treasonous act. Otherwise I sure it was just a polite call...

My G.... some of you go apes..t over an isolated incident like Benghazi, but have no problem with your government officials cutting side deals with arch enemies of the US. The Cons are such an inconsistent lot.
 
No one has ever been prosecuted under the Logan Act, so Flynn probably feels fairly invincible.

But if he lies to the FBI...
 
pragmatic said:
So Maddow is just winging it??

She stated categorically that Flynn made a deal with the Russians. Is that just what she imagines happened? Or what Maddow is desperately hoping happened?
Click to expand...

Hard to say. How would any of us really know?

Honestly, I don't care much for Maddow's snarky and mockingly reporting. I also have a hard time looking at her but I digress.

But, as far as cable pundits go, her research department is one of the best and probably has less Pinocchio's or "Liar, liar, pants on fire's" than the others, I would imagine.

So, if I were to bet a nickle, I would bet on her having her facts straight before going on air with it.

But...... I wouldn't bet a dime, either way.

Just sayin'.
 
prometeus said:
And the cluster **** this Administration is turning out to be just continues.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/09/...-sanctions-before-trump-took-office.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

From the article:

said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing classified material.
Click to expand...

Seems that whenever we hear this kind of thing the whole story turns out to be nothing but a lie. Sorry but the NYT's and WaPo have not had all that great of a track record lately. I simply cannot believe anything that they say anymore when they cite "anonymous sources". They used to be fairly respectable. Now they're just rags.
 
JackA said:
So said one source. Other sources said Flynn went much further. The point is you guys for the most part wouldn't mind if Flynn had negotiated with the Ambassador, or if the Russians did interfere in the election on behalf of Trump or even if Trump disregarded the orders of a court and did what he wanted on the travel ban, the latter according to polls of Trump supporters. In other words, disloyal Americans in the guise of patriots.
Click to expand...

Who are you guys? Your entire post has no matter of fact. You really don't have any idea what I think.
Just one more mud sling to see what sticks to the wall.
 
As it turns out Flynn IS a douche bag and no amount of deflections and apologies from the Trump fluffers will change that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom