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 (14 Viewers)
- Thread starter whoknew
- Start date
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The part where he asks rhetorically why Flynn was not charged with it as though there was some flaw in the charges about it?
ren hoek
Footballguy
Could you quote it? The part where you say he "indicated golly there's nothing wrong with the PNSA getting paid by Turkey"?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
He doesn't mention Flynn getting paid by Turkey at all. That's part of my point.
Because he was given a sweetheart deal, that's why.
Widbil83
Footballguy
President Trump tweeting an article about the January 5th 2017 infamous Obama regime Oval Office meeting. 
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1259215531153993729?s=21
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1259215531153993729?s=21
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Having hid behind Mueller's skirts and his reliance on the 1974 & 1999 DOJ OLC memos saying that Presidents cannot be indicted or even have indictment evaluations made about them, Trump supporters now fever dream about the prior president being indicted.President Trump tweeting an article about the January 5th 2017 infamous Obama regime Oval Office meeting.
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1259215531153993729?s=21
Thunderlips
Footballguy
Obama doing due dilligence as the acting CiC. Good for him.President Trump tweeting an article about the January 5th 2017 infamous Obama regime Oval Office meeting.
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1259215531153993729?s=21
The Z Machine
Footballguy
None of the things that Obama did come close to the authoritarian actions of the Trump administration. Barr's actions are on another level.Wow, this is tone deaf. You know what forum you're in?
You're side has been on a seek and destroy mission for the last 3.5 years, throwing any allegation - no matter how minor or wildly untrue - at Trump to get him.
At least own it if you're going to accuse the other side of doing it. And yeah, we have seen a Democrat POTUS do egregious stuff before - like Obama. Fast and Furious? Weaponizing the IRS to go after political rivals? Hello?
C'mon, man.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Nicely done outline of how the Trump Administration was sabotaged by the outgoing administration.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/08/obama-biden-oval-office-meeting-on-january-5-was-key-to-entire-anti-trump-operation/
https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/08/obama-biden-oval-office-meeting-on-january-5-was-key-to-entire-anti-trump-operation/
sho nuff
Footballguy
How many times must the IRS claim be proven false?Wow, this is tone deaf. You know what forum you're in?
You're side has been on a seek and destroy mission for the last 3.5 years, throwing any allegation - no matter how minor or wildly untrue - at Trump to get him.
At least own it if you're going to accuse the other side of doing it. And yeah, we have seen a Democrat POTUS do egregious stuff before - like Obama. Fast and Furious? Weaponizing the IRS to go after political rivals? Hello?
C'mon, man.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
B and S.
You guys don't even know what authoritarianism is. You should live under a real authoritarian government. If you did, you wouldn't be posting on internet message boards. You'd most likely be dead or in prison.
This over dramatic nonsense is ridiculous. Get outta here with that stuff.
Last edited by a moderator:
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Well here is one Judge that gets it 
Jeanine Pirro
@JudgeJeanine
The release this week of long hidden transcripts fully expose the lefts attempt at a coup d’état, albeit bloodless, but a coup nonetheless where a faction of the government tries to take down the leader of the country. #OpeningStatement pic.twitter.com/3VJ0Md2Qnk
5/9/20, 9:13 PM
Jeanine Pirro
@JudgeJeanine
The release this week of long hidden transcripts fully expose the lefts attempt at a coup d’état, albeit bloodless, but a coup nonetheless where a faction of the government tries to take down the leader of the country. #OpeningStatement pic.twitter.com/3VJ0Md2Qnk
5/9/20, 9:13 PM
dkp993
Footballguy
I for one can’t wait for Judge Judy’s thoughts on the matter.Well here is one Judge that gets it
Jeanine Pirro
@JudgeJeanine
The release this week of long hidden transcripts fully expose the lefts attempt at a coup d’état, albeit bloodless, but a coup nonetheless where a faction of the government tries to take down the leader of the country. #OpeningStatement pic.twitter.com/3VJ0Md2Qnk
5/9/20, 9:13 PM
dozer
Footballguy
Is there really a universe where this lady is credible?Well here is one Judge that gets it
Jeanine Pirro
@JudgeJeanine
The release this week of long hidden transcripts fully expose the lefts attempt at a coup d’état, albeit bloodless, but a coup nonetheless where a faction of the government tries to take down the leader of the country. #OpeningStatement pic.twitter.com/3VJ0Md2Qnk
5/9/20, 9:13 PM
sho nuff
Footballguy
One where IGs and Federal judges words are partisan drivel and deep state.
We are lost as a country because a large percentage of people believe that.
Meuller said Trump would be indicted if it was allowed.Wow, this is tone deaf. You know what forum you're in?
You're side has been on a seek and destroy mission for the last 3.5 years, throwing any allegation - no matter how minor or wildly untrue - at Trump to get him.
At least own it if you're going to accuse the other side of doing it. And yeah, we have seen a Democrat POTUS do egregious stuff before - like Obama. Fast and Furious? Weaponizing the IRS to go after political rivals? Hello?
C'mon, man.
Then on a whole other issue Trump was impeached.
Not wild allegations. Recorded history that will forever be taught in history class.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
dkp993
Footballguy
dkp993
Footballguy
ooooh oooh can I answer! 
jerseydevil20
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
I have done it multiple times. Would you like to refute the Inspector General and House Oversight Committee?
https://oversight.house.gov/investigations/investigation-of-irs
In February 2012, former Chairman Darrell Issa and Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan asked the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) to conduct a review into concerns that the IRS was applying inappropriate scrutiny to certain applications for tax-exempt status. In May 2013, TIGTA issued its report and concluded that the IRS had used inappropriate criteria in determining tax-exempt status.
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.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The IRS scandal is almost quaint now in retrospect. That was an ‘old days’ scandal. There were hints and indications of political influence. Lerner ***testified. She pleaded the 5th. She lost her job. There was an investigation. Congressional oversight. Wow. - Now, the President doesn’t even recognize the Congress’ authority to look at such things. The President’s .Every.Word is laced with political influence. The AG speaks of ‘the winners’ writing history. Career public servants are fired and even criminally investigated for even mentioning issues that go against the President’s political posturings. In some instances the President has gone through 5-6 appointments in one position. The Appointments and Advise/Consent clauses of the US Constitution are entirely avoided. Heck even here in this case the AG - the THIRD in one term, himself the beneficiary of a political firing, intervened in a federal prosecution, forced out the line prosecutors, forced out the US Attorney, inserted his own assistant, and ghost wrote a highly charged political motion on behalf of the President and his political minion who has always been able to implicate the President in Crimes. - This comp is a joke.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The signature block on the Flynn motion is abnormal.
And Shea isn’t even admitted to the DC bar.
- US Attorney appearing in person, by himself, no prosecutors, and the wrong bar number. And he’s not even certified to practice in the court he filed in. What the hell.
And Shea isn’t even admitted to the DC bar.
- US Attorney appearing in person, by himself, no prosecutors, and the wrong bar number. And he’s not even certified to practice in the court he filed in. What the hell.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Founding Fathers disagreed with each other about a lot, but they would recognize Trump for what he is doing. It's the antithesis of the Constitution.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
As I said yesterday, you are pawning off partisan information as facts. What you listed was not a nonpartisan review of the IRS scandal. The chair is a Democrat congresswoman. Many believe it was a hatchet job (see below). Please stop beating posters over the heads with misinformation. TIA
https://votesmart.org/public-statement/925424/rep-carolyn-maloney-inept-confused-at-irs-corruption-hearing#.XrfrayUpCEc
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
And the left will remain silent about it. That's the way things work. Kinda like the difference between Kavanaugh and Biden playing out right before us.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
What about Reuters? Is this newspaper article biased? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tax-teaparty/in-tea-party-probe-irs-interviews-show-no-political-bias-idUSBRE96F0Z320130716
So, to recap, both conservative and liberal political groups were targeted, the Obama White House wasn't involved, and Obama fired the head of the IRS (and others) for the lack of oversight in this area.
I don't think this is comparable to the abuse of the appointments clause to appoint lackeys in key positions who then overide the assigned prosecuting DOJ attorneys and file motions on behalf of a convicted defendant who admitted to his crimes under oath.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A top Democrat investigating Internal Revenue Service scrutiny of conservative groups on Tuesday said interviews with 15 agency employees had found no hint of White House involvement, challenging Republicans on a lingering controversy.
Moving to reframe an affair that first rocked the tax-collecting agency in May, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee issued a 36-page memo that quoted IRS officials interviewed by panel investigators and internal IRS documents. As of late Tuesday, 16 employees have been interviewed and more are expected.
"None of these (15) witnesses reported any political motivation or White House involvement," Democratic Representative Elijah Cummings said in releasing the memo.
More than two months ago, an IRS official publicly apologized for the IRS giving extra scrutiny to conservative political groups seeking tax-exempt status, including using key words like "Tea Party" and "Patriot" to flag applications.
One IRS official quoted in Cummings' memo is described as a Republican IRS tax law specialist working in Washington.
Asked by congressional investigators if there was any evidence of political targeting by President Barack Obama, the official said, "That's kind of laughable that people think that ... unfortunately, Cincinnati didn't have enough guidance."
Processing of applications for tax-exempt status from non-profit groups is centralized in an IRS office in Cincinnati.
Of the 15 IRS employees interviewed as of Monday, six described themselves as Republicans, or said they had voted for a Republican, three identified themselves as Democrats and six said they had no party affiliation.
Another self-described Republican manager interviewed by the committee said: "I have no idea what the White House is doing."
Most Republicans, including oversight panel Chairman Darrell Issa, early on in the controversy said the targeting of conservative groups showed political bias within the IRS under the Obama administration.
A spokesman for Issa was not available for comment.
Partisan sparks are likely to fly on Thursday when two mid-level IRS workers and the Treasury inspector general for tax administration are scheduled to testify before the committee.
An inspector general report on the matter came days after the IRS official apologized, triggering the controversy.
Last week, Cummings released documents suggesting that liberal key words such as "Progressive" and "Occupy" were also used by IRS staff to sift through applications for added review, in addition to conservative key words.
Cummings and other Democrats have blasted TIGTA chief Russell George for not addressing the treatment of liberal-leaning groups in its report.
TIGTA has said it stands by its findings and testimony.
The affair led Obama to oust the IRS chief from his job and several others were removed from their posts at the agency.
Cummings on Friday released a May 3, 2013, email between George and his deputy for investigations. In those documents, the deputy concluded after a search of 5,500 IRS emails that there was no sign of political motives in Tea Party searches.
The search was omitted from the TIGTA report.
Groups seeking tax exemption may engage in limited amounts of political activity, but some types of exemption limit that activity more than others. That and the vagueness of the rules often make it difficult for IRS agents to tell which groups overstep and become ineligible for tax exemption.
"There isn't an obvious answer of how to treat these groups, so you have a hot potato," said Gene Steuerle, a top tax Treasury official for Republican President George H.W. Bush.
NO EVIDENCE OF IRS TARGETING POLITICAL CANDIDATES
Republicans have contended the controversy shows the IRS is an out-of-control agency with a track record of harassing taxpayers, including by auditing candidates and donors.
Senator Charles Grassley on Tuesday released a letter from TIGTA finding no evidence that IRS officials inappropriately targeted candidates for public office, in a search of cases since 2006.
In response to request from Grassley, the inspector general letter did identify eight allegations where IRS officials had unauthorized access to or disclosed tax records for political candidates or donors.
In four of the cases, the allegations were not backed up by evidence, the inspector general said in its letter dated July 3.
One case of willful unauthorized access was referred to the Justice Department for investigation, but it declined to prosecute.
The Justice Department said it is reviewing Grassley's request for the rationale for not prosecuting.
So, to recap, both conservative and liberal political groups were targeted, the Obama White House wasn't involved, and Obama fired the head of the IRS (and others) for the lack of oversight in this area.
I don't think this is comparable to the abuse of the appointments clause to appoint lackeys in key positions who then overide the assigned prosecuting DOJ attorneys and file motions on behalf of a convicted defendant who admitted to his crimes under oath.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Z Machine
Footballguy
I'd be down to get rid of Biden, Trump, and Kavennaugh. Got no love for any of them.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
FYI, that vote smart link that @knowledge dropper posted was a press release from a Republican congressmember (Nick Di Iorio). Hardly a non-partisan commentary.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
I am not going to continue getting into the IRS. As the article below illustrates, it is hardly a case of no wrongdoing case closed. We are all sick of being blasted with bogus misinformation and falsehood charges.
Why this gets brought up continually in this thread is it shows the cut-throat, scorched earth, Chicago-style politics used by the Obama Administration. Now we have someone in the DOJ competent and strong enough to peel back all these layers, it appears Barr may be on the cusp of revealing a very devious plan that went all the way to the top. Stay tuned. Mueller Time lasted years, let’s give Durham a few months.
Why this gets brought up continually in this thread is it shows the cut-throat, scorched earth, Chicago-style politics used by the Obama Administration. Now we have someone in the DOJ competent and strong enough to peel back all these layers, it appears Barr may be on the cusp of revealing a very devious plan that went all the way to the top. Stay tuned. Mueller Time lasted years, let’s give Durham a few months.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/06/true-vote-wins-battle-irs-judge-orders-tax-agency-pay-legal-fees-decade-long-fight/
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
>>U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton ruled in favor of True the Vote in the case<<
- Well that’s interesting at least. Judge Walton just excoriated Barr for being completely untrustworthy and ordered him to turn over an unredacted version of the Mueller report for his review and release.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Official reporting of the House Oversight Committee is not partisan drivel or misinformation. Just because you don't like the chair...doesn't make their work partisan drivel.
It cited the actual report. https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2013reports/201310053fr.pdf
Here are the portions discussed. Look around page 8 and keep reading...where they discuss other political issues not named tea party...and that the overall statistical review found 2 items out of 94...projeting to a total of 44 applications out of 2,051 that did not receive scrutity that should have. Seriously...2%, and that was not even mentioning that those 44 were democratic either btw...just political things that could/should have been ispected further or rejected. And another 6% should have been asked for more information.
Further...they reviewed those applications that were scrutinized by the IRS...
Most should have been scrutinized...nor did they identify bias in which ones actually were scrutinized.
Read further on to the recommendations...see any about targeting political enemies? See that none of the findings stated they were doing such a thing? The IG did not find as you and others have claimed. Period. Its there in the reports...its in the summaries of the reports I linked to (which were accurate based on what the report did say. That is not misinformation, that is not partisan drivel. That is the facts of the Audit and the report.
And that is not even all of it...there was another audit...this one specifically looking at the criteria used to identify what to review. Guess what...its even worse for your narrative.
https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2017reports/201710054fr.pdf
If you don't wish to read the report...there are several news outlets who cite the report and are listed as rating high for factual reporting.
https://www.npr.org/2017/10/05/555975207/as-irs-targeted-tea-party-groups-it-went-after-progressives-too
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-11-20/gop-surrenders-cherished-irs-scandal-at-last
Though...that one is an opinion piece...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/politics/irs-targeting-tea-party-liberals-democrats.html?auth=login-google
They were targeting political groups for scrutiny...period.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
It's pretty hard to keep track of Barr's perfidy. What case is this? And where can I read the ruliing?
Ok, this was a year ago. Not following you here.
Last edited by a moderator:
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Stop it. How have businesses been winning lawsuits? You are wrong and I am not wasting anymore time on this.
Enjoy Mother’s Day.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Here's the ruling.
****
The Court has grave concerns about the objectivity of the process that preceded the public release of the redacted version of the Mueller Report and its impacts on the Department’s subsequent justifications that its redactions of the Mueller Report are authorized by the FOIA.
****
As noted earlier, the Court has reviewed the redacted version of the Mueller Report, Attorney General Barr’s representations made during his April 18, 2019 press conference, and Attorney General Barr’s April 18, 2019 letter. And, the Court cannot reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report. The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary. These circumstances generally, and Attorney General Barr’s lack of candor specifically, call into question Attorney General Barr’s credibility and in turn, the Department’s representation that “all of the information redacted from the version of the [Mueller] Report released by [ ] Attorney General [Barr]” is protected from disclosure by its claimed FOIA exemptions.
In the Court’s view, Attorney General Barr’s representation that the Mueller Report would be “subject only to those redactions required by law or by compelling law enforcement, national security, or personal privacy interests” cannot be credited without the Court’s independent verification in light of Attorney General Barr’s conduct and misleading public statements about the findings in the Mueller Report, id., Ex. 7 (April 18, 2019 Letter) at 3, and it would be disingenuous for the Court to conclude that the redactions of the Mueller Report pursuant to the FOIA are not tainted by Attorney General Barr’s actions and representations. And, despite the Department’s representation that it “review[ed] the full unredacted [Mueller] Report for disclosure pursuant to the FOIA,” Brinkmann Decl. ¶ 11, the Court cannot ignore that the Department’s withholdings under the FOIA exemptions mirror the redactions made pursuant to Attorney General Barr’s guidance, which cause the Court to question whether the redactions are self-serving and were made to support, or at the very least to not undermine, Attorney General Barr’s public statements and whether the Department engaged in post-hoc rationalization to justify Attorney General Barr’s positions.
****
However, Special Counsel Mueller himself took exception to Attorney General Barr’s March 24, 2019 letter, stating that Attorney General Barr “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of th[e] [Special Counsel’s] Office’s work and conclusions,” EPIC’s Mot., Ex. 4 (March 27, 2019 Letter) at 1, and a review of the redacted version of the Mueller Report by the Court results in the Court’s concurrence with Special Counsel Mueller’s assessment that Attorney General Barr distorted the findings in the Mueller Report. Specifically, Attorney General Barr’s summary failed to indicate that Special Counsel Mueller “identified multiple contacts—‘links,’ in the words of the Appointment Order—between Trump [c]ampaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government,” Def.’s Mot., Ex. D (Mueller Report – Volume I) at 66, and that Special Counsel Mueller only concluded that the investigation did not establish that “these contacts involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump [c]ampaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the [Trump] [c]ampaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future,” because coordination—the term that appears in the Appointment Order—“does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law,” id., Ex. D (Mueller Report – Volume I) at 2, 66. Attorney General Barr also failed to disclose to the American public that, with respect to Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation into whether President Trump obstructed justice, Special Counsel Mueller “determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment[,] . . . recogniz[ing] that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting [p]resident would place burdens on the [p]resident’s capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct,” ...
****
@knowledge dropper, that's the same judge you just applauded for the True the Vote case vs the IRS.
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
Stop what? I posted the exact quotes and reports of 2 IG reports stating there was no targeting of enemies...to claim I am wrong...and to bring absolutely nothing to the table other than a Republican complaint about a chairperson, and a Breitbart article is laughable.
Read the reports...its all there in black and white. The IRS targeted political groups...often as they should have been scrutinized.
dkp993
Footballguy
Cuz the right is so virtuous. Please. Both parties are corrupt to their core and will lie, cheat or steal to keep power. This has been proven true both ways more times then one can count.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Stop right there. The left was supposed to be the party that believed victims. They were supposed to be the antithesis of the old, white, male Republicans. Instead they are the same thing and people on these boards act like the Republicans are some mean bad institution when the reality of the matter is so are the Democrats only the Democrats actually try to act like they're not, but they are.
It makes me sick when I see someone take the position, so what if Biden assaulted a women, so did Trump. Like we have to pick which sexual predator we like more. The Democrats had options and this is the one they chose. Republicans already sold their souls with Trump. It took 3.5 years of Trump for the Democrats to follow suit.
dkp993
Footballguy
You seemed to have missed the part where I said both sides were corrupt, kind the point of the whole post. No where in there did I defend the left.
Last edited by a moderator:
jm192
Footballguy
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
You're treating both parties like they are starting from the same position. They're not. The Democrats held (and they can't anymore) as a party the had some moral standards. Now, they are showing that they are not who we thought/hoped they were. Most on the right already knew this, hopefully people on the left will start to realize. Time to find a third party. Bernie Sanders would be a perfect leader to start a "Democratic Socialist" party to put some real pressure on the Democrats to do some soul searching and get back to being a party that America can be proud of. Until that time, no blue, no matter who.
Trump is a sexual predator.The Z Machine said:
Kavanaugh? His testimony was more damming then the Ford accusations. He was talking about Clinton conspiracy theories out to get him. It was a scary monologue. Unfit for such a position.
Biden- I believe he has been inappropriate with woman. Like lingering hand on shoulder stuff. He is also almost 80 from a different era. I believe Reade’s 2019 story not her latest one.
I don’t think Kavanaugh nor Biden are in the same universe as Trump is when it comes to a history of this type of behavior.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
IOW, no one legally empowered to drop the case against Flynn was willing to sign their name to the document. So Barr got some lackey who isn't even a member of the bar to sign it using the bar number of someone else.
Imagine believing that dropping the case is the up and up.
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993
Footballguy
You’re a smart dude, I know this because you’ve made cogent arguments here. To not see the hole in your argument here I can only put off as partisanship. They are exactly the same. The right is supposed to be the party of Jesus and personal responsibility. They are neither.Snotbubbles said:
I couldn’t agree with the 3rd party thoughts more. I’ve been banging that drum around here for years.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
This is particularly pathetic from Taibbi and really disappointing. I can’t think of a better example of the horseshoe effect and the cratering of principle that exists in this corner of the left wing.ren hoek said:
Last edited by a moderator:
