What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn (7 Viewers)

Trump said while speaking with Fox & Friends...
Strong source here.

House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) released 57 interview transcripts on Thursday from the committee’s probe
Thanks for the update. I see where Schiff was described as "nervous" after fighting for 13 months with the Trump ODNI & DOJ to extricate this public information into the open.

 
knowledge dropper said:
This is partisan drivel that support your side. Not facts.  
Few things...you have yet to bring  single link of any kind supporting your assertions that the IRS or FBI targeted political enemies.

Next...please refrain from insulting accusations like this that I have posted partisan drivel.

I posted the link to the oversight committee citing the inspector General.  The following is neither partisan, nor drivel.

"Although the Inspector General later testified that he had found no evidence of political bias in the IRS’s handling of any tax-exempt applications, TIGTA’s report failed to explicitly include this finding.  Moreover, TIGTA’s review was critically flawed because it failed to include in its investigation progressive groups that were also subjected to similarly inappropriate screening criteria by the IRS. "

Neither is this...about the FISA and FBI from Horowitz

"The decision to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was made by the FBI's then Counterintelligence Division (CD) Assistant Director (AD), E.W. "Bill" Priestap, and reflected a consensus reached after multiple days of discussions and meetings among senior FBI officials. We concluded that AD Priestap's exercise of discretion in opening the investigation was in compliance with Department and FBI policies, and we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced his decision. While the information in the FBI's possession at the time was limited, in light of the low threshold established by Department and FBI predication policy, we found that Crossfire Hurricane was opened for an authorized investigative purpose and with sufficient factual predication."

That is on page 410.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

Again...none of what I have said is partisan nor is it drivel...please stop making such bogus allegations about me.

 
jm192 said:
I guess, what am I missing?

Documents come out that show the FBI tried to trap Flynn--and the DOJ is bad for letting him go?  I hope I'm not prosecuted if the FBI ever decides to go after me.  We should all be slamming the FBI here.  And instead the DOJ is the bad entity?
Documents did not show they tried to trap him though...he even stated to the judge he was not entrapped by the FBI.

The DOJ, acting apart from the actual prosecutors...with people who were never confirmed to be in a position, are going against the rulings of a federal judge at this point to drop charges.

The FBI...while not perfect, does not appear to have been doing anything illegally or improper.

 
dkp993 said:
With the last few pages of “discussions” going on I’m now 100% sure you guys are just about to convince each other that you’re right. Keep up the good fight, you’re all close. 
I think its more of combating misinformation and completely false accusations.

When we are now at a point where Inspectors General's opinions are being called partisan drivel...its not about convincing anyone that Im right...its about posting correct information to fight pure propaganda.

 
You want to talk about partisan drivel...you just posted a Breitbart link, citing Trump making claims to Fox News.

What would you call such a link and story if that isn't partisan?  In what way is that a credible link to anything?

And yes...that is a lot of posts in a row...but think it is important to point out the inconsistencies here as well as what appears to be complete misinformation being posted.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You want to talk about partisan drivel...you just posted a Breitbart link, citing Trump making claims to Fox News.

What would you call such a link and story if that isn't partisan?  In what way is that a credible link to anything?

And yes...that is a lot of posts in a row...but think it is important to point out the inconsistencies here as well as what appears to be complete misinformation being posted.
:shrug:

News of the Day.  Sorry you don’t want to hear it.  Please put me on ignore if you feel these highlights from a direct interview with the President is misinformation.  

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
This is the transcript.

- Sorry, before getting further into this, what does a Defense official who left in 2015 have to do with this?


Lord the woman was speaking at a security forum, you'd think she was charging the barricades.

>>On Thursday, Farkas floated a theory, without citing evidence, that the president may actually owe money to Russia, something that could be influencing his posture toward the government.<<

In which Fox actually accidentally reports the news.
People cited her 🤷‍♂️

 
This is great. Barr is a modern day Elliot Ness.  It’s fantastic to see he has some muscle with him with Rep. Jordan.  
That's a video of an un-nominated, unqualified, unconfirmed ex-blogger handing off classified documents to a guy who buried Iran Contra. He's a corrupt unitarian law authoritarian who has no regard for democratic standards. And apparently Fox was invited to televise the every day walking around of cabinet members. I realize it's schtick but it should be pushed back on.

 
:shrug:

News of the Day.  Sorry you don’t want to hear it.  Please put me on ignore if you feel these highlights from a direct interview with the President is misinformation.  
Its not news...its Trump making claims to one partisan network and being picked up by another partisan source.

Meanwhile...you have claimed citing Inspectors General is partisan drivel.  Care to address the post I made citing the IG's about the IRS and FBI?  Or just another laughing like?

Yes...Trump's claims are very likely misinformation.  Based on his long history of such lies and false claims that are not backed up with anything factual.

 
People cited her 🤷‍♂️
Right, "without citing evidence," and as noted in the prior linked piece, she did not claim she had evidence of collusion on msnbc. - This will get one called before the GOP HSIC.

eta:

On Thursday, Farkas floated a theory, without citing evidence, that the president may actually owe money to Russia, something that could be influencing his posture toward the government.

“The influence these Russians have on him could be greater because of these business ties and because he may owe them money and of course the issue of his campaign manager and all the work he was doing and whether he was indebted to Russians or not,” she said.
- Fox

And we still don't know the answer to the first part.

The second part was proved to be true.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is great. Barr is a modern day Elliot Ness.  It’s fantastic to see he has some muscle with him with Rep. Jordan.  
Jordan is muscle?  Barr thus far appears to be overstepping the bounds of the law in many cases.  Do you honestly think Biden or Obama would be charged...and even found guilty?

 
Jordan is muscle?  Barr thus far appears to be overstepping the bounds of the law in many cases.  Do you honestly think Biden or Obama would be charged...and even found guilty?
If they instructed the FBI to Target the candidate of the other political party with no evidence, they will go down.  I would expect they have fall guys.  

 
If they instructed the FBI to Target the candidate of the other political party with no evidence, they will go down.  I would expect they have fall guys.  
There is zero evidence of that...I quoted Horowitz in the post you have basically ignored proving that earlier posts were not partisan drivel.

There is no evidence anyone targeted a candidate with no evidence...not even a shred of such an indication at this point.

 
There is zero evidence of that...I quoted Horowitz in the post you have basically ignored proving that earlier posts were not partisan drivel.

There is no evidence anyone targeted a candidate with no evidence...not even a shred of such an indication at this point.
That’s what this is all about. Flynn was targeted to get to Trump.  

 
That’s what this is all about. Flynn was targeted to get to Trump.  
The IG and Judge Sullivan have found this to be untrue.  Ive posted the links...we have seen the links to Sullivan shooting down these claims as well.  I posted the links showing the IRS targeting enemies was also not true.

In return...Breitbart, quoting FoxNews interview with Trump.  Yeah...let me believe the credible people like a federal judge and multiple IGs instead...seems more logical to do so.

 
I think its more of combating misinformation and completely false accusations.

When we are now at a point where Inspectors General's opinions are being called partisan drivel...its not about convincing anyone that Im right...its about posting correct information to fight pure propaganda.
Sho, it’s the same 20ish people here day in day out. The misinformation argument is falling on deaf ears. We all are where we are with all of this and no one is moving off of it. 

Drop some info and opinion and move on imo.  4 pages of back and forth “misinformation” correction from each side is a massive waste of time and space.  Good faith open dialogue with an exchange of ideas (even if no one moves off their “side”) is awesome and should be encouraged.  Unfortunately very little of that is happening at the moment.  

Just food for thought, do with it what you will. ✌️

 
Sho, it’s the same 20ish people here day in day out. The misinformation argument is falling on deaf ears. We all are where we are with all of this and no one is moving off of it. 

Drop some info and opinion and move on imo.  4 pages of back and forth “misinformation” correction from each side is a massive waste of time and space.  Good faith open dialogue with an exchange of ideas (even if no one moves off their “side”) is awesome and should be encouraged.  Unfortunately very little of that is happening at the moment.  

Just food for thought, do with it what you will. ✌️
Thanks.  Hopefully, it sinks in coming from someone he may consider a teammate.  

 
The exact same notes? The exact same documents?  There have been a lot of shady figures removed from the FBI since this all began.  
Yes. I quoted the portion from Sullivan's ruling further up.

Having carefully reviewed the interviewing FBI agents’ notes, the draft interview reports, the final version of the FD302, and the statements contained therein, the Court agrees with the government that those documents are “consistent and clear that [Mr. Flynn] made multiple false statements to the [FBI] agents about his communications with the Russian Ambassador on January 24, 2017.” Gov’t’s Surreply, ECF No. 132 at 4-5. The Court rejects Mr. Flynn’s request for additional information regarding the drafting process for the FD-302s and a search for the “original 302,” see Def.’s Sur-Surreply, ECF No. 135 at 8- 10, because the interviewing FBI agents’ notes, the draft interview reports, the final version of the FD-302, and Mr. Flynn’s own admissions of his false statements make clear that Mr. Flynn made those false statements.

 
jm192 said:
I guess, what am I missing?

Documents come out that show the FBI tried to trap Flynn--and the DOJ is bad for letting him go?  I hope I'm not prosecuted if the FBI ever decides to go after me.  We should all be slamming the FBI here.  And instead the DOJ is the bad entity?
Sigh.

The bad thing  - as has been explained ad naseum - is that this was done for purely partisan political purposes. The DOJ and FBI prosecute people like this all the time. This is the first time the DOJ has decided the FBI shouldn't do this and the AUSAs shouldn't use it as leverage.

If that were going to be a standard going forward - awesome. But you and I both know that the next time this happens to a drug dealer, they will use all the leverage they can to force him to cooperate.

 
And he knew those statements were apparently made as a result of blackmail?
It's a 99 page long ruling.  - Powell threw everything you have read or heard about from Breitbart to Hannity to the wildest qanon twitter handle you can imagine into it. As a matter of fact 95% of what you hear from them is generated by Powell herself.

-> Denied.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks.  Hopefully, it sinks in coming from someone he may consider a teammate.  
You realize he is saying that no matter how many facts I show you...that you still seem to be pushing the misinformation...right?

Can you agree the IRS targeting claim you made was not true?

Can you agree the IG stated that there was not political bias involved in the starting of the Russia investigation?

I ask...because I posted the government documents and reports of the Inspectors General in both cases.  And I predict this post will either get a laugh or go completely ignored....no possible way you even attempt answering those last two questions honestly.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
👍.  It won’t I have no illusions of it.  And I’m not sure I’d say we’re on the same team ( though in fairness I’m not sure I’d say that about anyone here).  
It may not...what can I say, when blatantaly bogus information gets posted, I challenge it.  And directly following this post of yours...we see another link to such misinformation followed by Saints thoroughly destroying the narrative.

We had another poster claim facts don't matter in regards to something because Flynn changed attorneys...the fact that the current attorney was around for the facts that were posted didn't seem to matter (and the post pointing that out...predictably was not responded to).

IMO...we are where we are because misinformation works too much...it convinces too many.  And it should be challenged again and again.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's a 99 page long ruling.  - Powell threw everything you have read or heard about from Breitbart to Hannity to the wildest qanon twitter handle you can imagine into it. As a matter of fact 95% of what you hear from them is generated by Powell herself.

-> Denied.
I guess Trump will need to pardon if the Deep State can’t be budged.  Trump’s second term should be all about removing these people root and stem.  

 
I guess Trump will need to pardon if the Deep State can’t be budged.  Trump’s second term should be all about removing these people root and stem.  
You may still get your wish. Sullivan has to rule on this. One hitch is that he’s probably never seen or heard of a prosecutor show up and file a motion for the defense. Also US Attorneys typically don’t file motions themselves much less for line prosecutors who resign in protest.

Trump is unbound by the Constitution. You wanted that, you got it, and anything is possible, yes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess Trump will need to pardon if the Deep State can’t be budged.  Trump’s second term should be all about removing these people root and stem.  
So just to be clear and so I understand your position. This judge is deep state because he disagrees with the finding of this one specific IG who’s made a ruling not seen before?

 
I am just glad Barr and Durham are finally looking at the entire case.  I trust the process.  I did not before.  
Cool.
As someone who’s trying to get a grasp of the situation (myself being that person), why do you trust it more now than before? Is it simply your political ideology leading that or something else? For the record I’m honestly asking not trying to play gotcha.  Absent my distain for Trump I’m pretty squarely in the middle, which means I have a pretty healthy distrust for both sides. So I’m wondering why you trust it so much more now than before. 

 
Cool.
As someone who’s trying to get a grasp of the situation (myself being that person), why do you trust it more now than before? Is it simply your political ideology leading that or something else? For the record I’m honestly asking not trying to play gotcha.  Absent my distain for Trump I’m pretty squarely in the middle, which means I have a pretty healthy distrust for both sides. So I’m wondering why you trust it so much more now than before. 
Too many political holdovers and folks with vested interest had their hands in the cookie jar.  The previous investigation did not even touch on the validity of tailing the Trump campaign.  I think we all need to know that. It looked to me they had a destination in mind and drew the map as they wanted to get to that destination (Russian interference assisted by Trump).  I want a deeper dive and expanded scope than what we saw with Mueller.  

 
IG's are not political holdovers.  They do not have vested interests.  Neither did Mueller.  Neither did Judge Sullivan.

I mean come on...to claim others are political and have a vested interest...yet trust Barr and his appointee (not an Inspector General)?  Despite Barr's attitudes of the authority of the executive and his numerous ties to Trump from the start?  He isn't political?

 
for 3 years Clapper & Brennan were going on CNN and claiming Trump colluded with Russia or Trump was in their pocket, etc, etc.  Now it comes out in their sworn testimony:

Clapper:  “I never saw any direct, empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or somebody in it was plotting or conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.”   This in 2017.

Brennan did the same.  

CLAPPER: (7/19/2019) I really do wonder whether the Russians have something on him.

BRENNAN: (3/21/2018) The Russians may have something on him personally.

CLAPPER: (12/18/2017) What a great case officer Vladimir Putin is. He knows how to handle an asset, and that’s what he is doing with the president.

BRENNAN: (10/2/19) He knows that Russia interfered on his behalf. He really is hoping that his pal Vladimir is going to come through once again.

disgusting & a coup attempt starting when Trump was elected.  IMO

 
for 3 years Clapper & Brennan were going on CNN and claiming Trump colluded with Russia or Trump was in their pocket, etc, etc.  Now it comes out in their sworn testimony:

Clapper:  “I never saw any direct, empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or somebody in it was plotting or conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.”   This in 2017.

Brennan did the same.  

CLAPPER: (7/19/2019) I really do wonder whether the Russians have something on him.

BRENNAN: (3/21/2018) The Russians may have something on him personally.

CLAPPER: (12/18/2017) What a great case officer Vladimir Putin is. He knows how to handle an asset, and that’s what he is doing with the president.

BRENNAN: (10/2/19) He knows that Russia interfered on his behalf. He really is hoping that his pal Vladimir is going to come through once again.

disgusting & a coup attempt starting when Trump was elected.  IMO
All of this because Queen Hillary lost.  No way were they going to let that go.  So for 3.5 years everyone was spoonfed a fake narrative and they all believed it.

This is yet another example of why the MSM media cannot be trusted.  

 
for 3 years Clapper & Brennan were going on CNN and claiming Trump colluded with Russia or Trump was in their pocket, etc, etc.  Now it comes out in their sworn testimony:

Clapper:  “I never saw any direct, empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or somebody in it was plotting or conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.”   This in 2017.

Brennan did the same.  

CLAPPER: (7/19/2019) I really do wonder whether the Russians have something on him.

BRENNAN: (3/21/2018) The Russians may have something on him personally.

CLAPPER: (12/18/2017) What a great case officer Vladimir Putin is. He knows how to handle an asset, and that’s what he is doing with the president.

BRENNAN: (10/2/19) He knows that Russia interfered on his behalf. He really is hoping that his pal Vladimir is going to come through once again.

disgusting & a coup attempt starting when Trump was elected.  IMO
Brennan is one of the biggest villains in this drama.   He should have his own dark theme music when he is on set. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top