US Politics Thread

[brokenshoelace]

What you missed in my original response to you was the point that you came on during the holidays merely to post that someone else was stupid, you old Grinch. You can call me ham-fisted, but not when you fail to recognize that subtlety in the intent. As to need for authority and corrective measures...no. This is the internet. You called AP stupid. I called you a dick. Standard forum childishness. We just used more words. Happy New Year.

Never debated that I'm a dick. It didn't offend me in any way. The forced comparison was my issue.

 

[calitennis127]

I did read the link you cited. I'm not clear as to what part of "lying to the FBI" you don't understand. It's a common tactic of the FBI to lull people they're interested in to a comfortable position.

Lol.....goodness fucking gracious. We're talking about the incoming national security adviser of the United States. This isn't some low level sting operation to bust somebody who runs a drug ring in Oklahoma.

There was absolutely no predicate for investigating Flynn. None. What crime was he suspected of? Talking to a Russian diplomat as an incoming member of a presidential administration? If so, then every incoming national security adviser for the last 100 years is a suspected criminal. How can someone of that stature in a presidential administration avoid talking to a Russian ambassador when they are the U.S.'s main nuclear competitor?

This is what your argument amounts to: if someone works in a presidential administration or at the State Department and they are talking to someone at the FBI casually in a hallway, they should assume that they are being investigated on the spot. Do you know how ridiculous that is?

Regular Joe's fall for it, but Flynn knew what he was doing. If he was "dissuaded from having attorneys present," as your link states, then he should have seen the red flag. Either way, he shouldn't have lied to the FBI.

Or perhaps he didn't lie to the FBI, and perhaps McCabe lied to him. You should consider the possibility that the people who serve the interests of your social agenda might, just might, do something unethical.

Also, what kind of sleazy government investigator tells an incoming national security adviser to not have an attorney present so he can trap him into sort of "lying" about something? How could you condone that?

Oh, I know how. Anything that would lead to getting Trump out of office, somehow, some way - no matter how immoral or irrational - is okay with you.

"On top of that, this charge of "lying to federal authorities" is the weakest of all charges in the midst of a federal investigation. It is the last resort for investigators when they can't prove what they're really after." The Starr Investigation went after Whitewater and a myriad of other things, but what they ended up getting him on was lying under oath about an affair.

Yes, lying under oath is perjury (what Bill Clinton did and what more recently James Clapper and Mark Brennan have done). Saying something that Andrew McCabe thinks might be untrue or doesn't like in a casual conversation in a government hallway with no attorneys present is not perjury.

But lying to the FBI was stupid.

And why are you so sure that he did that?

 

[Moxie]

And why are you so sure that he did that?

Because he pled guilty to the charge.

 

[the AntiPusher]

What you missed in my original response to you was the point that you came on during the holidays merely to post that someone else was stupid, you old Grinch. You can call me ham-fisted, but not when you fail to recognize that subtlety in the intent. As to need for authority and corrective measures...no. This is the internet. You called AP stupid. I called you a dick. Standard forum childishness. We just used more words. Happy New Year.

You just gave Carol a hard time for wishing someone a crappy Christmas, and yet you make your only post in days just to call A-P stupid. Happy Holidays.

someone ( this isn't directed towards Cali, I have no issues with that poster whom always provide me with his own form of competitive banter) is speaking ill of me to get me to.respond ? Why?
(I am easy to find..I will be in Cincy in late August, sitting in the main stadium in the box seats behind the players).All you have to do is instruct the usher to come and get me. I will be happy to meet them in the beer garden face to face to provide the appropriate forum to address his/her concerns in regards to my IQ (tennis)..I think that is an offer that it would take a real coward to refuse. God Bless

 

[calitennis127]

Because he pled guilty to the charge.

Lol.....as usual, you are displaying complete ignorance about day-to-day politics beyond the headlines of the mainstream media that are created to generate hype and pro-Democratic Party bias in lazy and/or gullible people. Don't you know about the following info?

"One of the stranger moments of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe is Michael Flynn’s Dec. 1, 2017 guilty plea for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The former White House national security adviser pleaded guilty to a single count of making false statements, even though then FBI director James Comey had told Congress in March that the two FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn believed he hadn’t lied."

On Friday May 4, 2018, the House Intelligence Committee released a report on Russia. "On pages 53-54, the report notes that in March 2017 “Director Comey testified to the Committee that ‘the agents . . . discerned no physical indications of deception. They didn’t see any change in posture, in tone, in inflection, in eye contact. They saw nothing that indicated to them that he knew he was lying to them.’” The quotes are from the committee transcript of Mr. Comey’s remarks.

The report goes on to say that then Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe “confirmed the interviewing agent’s initial impression and stated that the ‘conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements that he made in the interview . . . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.’”

The Mystery of Michael Flynn’s Guilty Plea

He pleaded guilty to a crime FBI agents said he didn’t commit.

www.wsj.com

 

[brokenshoelace]

someone ( this isn't directed towards Cali, I have no issues with that poster whom always provide me with his own form of competitive banter) is speaking ill of me to get me to.respond ? Why?
(I am easy to find..I will be in Cincy in late August, sitting in the main stadium in the box seats behind the players).All you have to do is instruct the usher to come and get me. I will be happy to meet them in the beer garden face to face to provide the appropriate forum to address his/her concerns in regards to my IQ (tennis)..I think that is an offer that it would take a real coward to refuse. God Bless

LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Thanks for proving my point.

@Moxie I expect my apology by DM. You're forgiven anyway. Happy New Year,

 

[calitennis127]

LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Thanks for proving my point.

@Moxie I expect my apology by DM. You're forgiven anyway. Happy New Year,

Well look at this.....Bwoken finds himself insulting the intelligence of a harsh Trump critic (Anti-Pusher). If he was only aware how dumb most Trump critics are in the United States he might just re-evaluate his own beliefs about what he calls "America." But then that would force him to confront his own ignorance and mental conformity as well, so it would be challenging. But given that it is early in 2020, maybe there is hope for him.

We shall see.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Well look at this.....Bwoken finds himself insulting the intelligence of a harsh Trump critic (Anti-Pusher). If he was only aware how dumb most Trump critics are in the United States he might just re-evaluate his own beliefs about what he calls "America." But then that would force him to confront his own ignorance and mental conformity as well, so it would be challenging. But given that it is early in 2020, maybe there is hope for him.

We shall see.

I replied to Broken on the NFL pick..it's my honest opinion broken would be more comfortable in the confines of a penial system . .it's very apparent

 

[calitennis127]

He’s talking horse shit. He was not tricked. This is a 3 star who ran a government agency. He lied to the FBI, he knew the law. He wasn’t some ignorant dummy like Cali’s orange buffoon

Flynn may not be an ignorant dummy, but people who actually believe the narrative of the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, and BBC generally fit that description. Just like Moxie, you arrogantly (and rather amusingly) repeat mainstream media news headlines and clichés as if they are the final word on everything. "Flynn lied to the FBI, ruff ruff ruff I'm making an intelligent point now. Ruff ruff ruff."

Apparently you weren't even aware of the WSJ editorial piece that lays out all the reasons why Flynn's guilty plea is, to say the least, highly dubious.

WSJ Sunday 05/06/2018

"One of the stranger moments of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe is Michael Flynn’s Dec. 1, 2017 guilty plea for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The former White House national security adviser pleaded guilty to a single count of making false statements, even though then FBI director James Comey had told Congress in March that the two FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn believed he hadn’t lied."

The Mystery of Michael Flynn’s Guilty Plea

He pleaded guilty to a crime FBI agents said he didn’t commit.

www.wsj.com

 

[calitennis127]

What does the Mueller report necessarily have to do with my statement.

Because, you f-ing idiot, you made a reference to Trump "soliciting" foreign help in the election - which is precisely the accusation that the Mueller report dealt with, particularly with respect to Wikileaks.

Also, the idea that Trump was "soliciting" assistance in his 2020 campaign on the call with Zelensky is laughable.....the information about Biden and Burisma was already out there. It wasn't news to anyone who follows politics. The chief law enforcer of the country has every right to ask for investigations when there is a legitimate predicate, and with the Bidens in Ukraine there absolutely is one.

Burisma is clearly a corrupt company involved in corrupt dealings, and Hunter Biden was getting paid large amounts for knowing nothing and doing nothing. It was entirely legitimate for Trump to ask that the matter be looked into.

He’s just been impeached for his malfeasance, how dense do you have to be not to get that.

Lol.....how dense do you have to be to actually believe there was any malfeasance or that the Democrats actually care about such standards? Are you kidding me? If they cared at all about potential "malfeasance," they would want the Bidens investigated because the arrangement Hunter Biden had with Burisma is suspicious no matter what angle you look at it from. And we know that the Obama administration felt the same way because Yovanovitch said in her testimony that she was coached on how to answer questions about Hunter Biden's dealings during her confirmation in 2016.

Didn't you watch the hearings dipshit? I thought you did. I guess not.

Trump was impeached for the following: 1) winning in 2016, 2) challenging the Democratic Party, 3) advancing ideas contrary to the Democratic Party religion/social agenda, 4) disturbing the mental equilibrium of Democrats on a daily basis, and 5) daring to challenge the Democrats' clearly corrupt relationship with many Ukrainian officials.

That's what he was impeached for. Not actual malfeasance.

And in case you take my non response to your comment about the Mueller report means I agree with you, then disabuse yourself of that assumption

You can disabuse yourself of the notion that I think you are astute or well-informed enough to question the silly and totally unproven assertion that Wikileaks got Hillary's emails from "the Russians." The Mueller report could not prove it and no one in the media has been able to prove it, even after trying very hard for years. That narrative amounts to nothing more than a joke and a dishonest ploy at this point.

 

[Moxie]

Lol.....as usual, you are displaying complete ignorance about day-to-day politics beyond the headlines of the mainstream media that are created to generate hype and pro-Democratic Party bias in lazy and/or gullible people. Don't you know about the following info?

"One of the stranger moments of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe is Michael Flynn’s Dec. 1, 2017 guilty plea for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The former White House national security adviser pleaded guilty to a single count of making false statements, even though then FBI director James Comey had told Congress in March that the two FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn believed he hadn’t lied."

On Friday May 4, 2018, the House Intelligence Committee released a report on Russia. "On pages 53-54, the report notes that in March 2017 “Director Comey testified to the Committee that ‘the agents . . . discerned no physical indications of deception. They didn’t see any change in posture, in tone, in inflection, in eye contact. They saw nothing that indicated to them that he knew he was lying to them.’” The quotes are from the committee transcript of Mr. Comey’s remarks.

The report goes on to say that then Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe “confirmed the interviewing agent’s initial impression and stated that the ‘conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements that he made in the interview . . . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.’”

The Mystery of Michael Flynn’s Guilty Plea

He pleaded guilty to a crime FBI agents said he didn’t commit.

www.wsj.com

The WSJ article is behind a pay-wall, so I can't read it. But you seem to dismiss what the judge has said about any notion that there are mitigating circumstances to Flynn's lying. This is from USA Today, so hardly what you'd call "liberal media."

Judge rejects Michael Flynn's claims of a government conspiracy to frame him

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 28.

www.usatoday.com

 

[the AntiPusher]

Cali..Let’s change the narrative..what are you thoughts about former Gov of Ohio John Kasich..as you know my friend my politics are very far to the Left but I could see myself voting for someone like him if he was running who isn’t so far to the Right..

 

[brokenshoelace]

Well look at this.....Bwoken finds himself insulting the intelligence of a harsh Trump critic (Anti-Pusher). If he was only aware how dumb most Trump critics are in the United States he might just re-evaluate his own beliefs about what he calls "America." But then that would force him to confront his own ignorance and mental conformity as well, so it would be challenging. But given that it is early in 2020, maybe there is hope for him.

We shall see.

Wow, this post is a few hours old and already it has aged well...

Speaking of Trump...please tell us more about his amazing foreign policy in light of recent developments. I'm honestly fascinated by the positive spin you'll attempt to put on this.

 

[brokenshoelace]

 

[calitennis127]

The WSJ article is behind a pay-wall, so I can't read it.

That's why I quoted some of it. But you did not address the substance of the quotation, namely that Comey told Congress in March 2017 (two months after the so-called "interview" of Flynn) that the impression of his case agents who spoke to Flynn was that Flynn was not lying. That's a pretty big deal, don't you think? The FBI director at the time tells Congress that his case agents who interviewed Flynn did not think he was lying. You may want to take into consideration that little bit of info in how you judge Flynn's case.

I'll post the full article in a later post.

But you seem to dismiss what the judge has said about any notion that there are mitigating circumstances to Flynn's lying.

That's right.....I don't agree with the judge. I also think the substance of the charge is based on the preposterous assumption that it is legitimate for the FBI to stick its nose into foreign affairs' conversations of a presidential administration. This is a quote straight from your USA Today article:

"Prosecutors charged that Flynn lied to FBI agents when he told them he did not discuss sanctions against Russia with then-ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Prosecutors also charged that Flynn lied when he said he did not ask Kislyak to delay a vote on a pending United Nations Security Council resolution critical of Israeli settlements."

What business is it of the FBI what Flynn is talking to Kislyak about? Let me ask you, Moxie, would you have been okay with Hillary-hating FBI agents eavesdropping on Hillary's calls and scrutinizing her words' to foreign diplomats as the incoming Secretary of State a month and a half after Obama got elected?

I highly doubt it.

This is from USA Today, so hardly what you'd call "liberal media."

I assure you that just about everyone who works there casts their ballot for the Democratic Party every two years. But aside from that matter, I don't consider the modern left to be "liberal" in any sense. The word "liberal" has positive connotations that the vast majority of Democrats do not deserve to be associated with.

 

[Federberg]

Flynn may not be an ignorant dummy, but people who actually believe the narrative of the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, and BBC generally fit that description. Just like Moxie, you arrogantly (and rather amusingly) repeat mainstream media news headlines and clichés as if they are the final word on everything. "Flynn lied to the FBI, ruff ruff ruff I'm making an intelligent point now. Ruff ruff ruff."

Apparently you weren't even aware of the WSJ editorial piece that lays out all the reasons why Flynn's guilty plea is, to say the least, highly dubious.

WSJ Sunday 05/06/2018

"One of the stranger moments of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe is Michael Flynn’s Dec. 1, 2017 guilty plea for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The former White House national security adviser pleaded guilty to a single count of making false statements, even though then FBI director James Comey had told Congress in March that the two FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn believed he hadn’t lied."

The Mystery of Michael Flynn’s Guilty Plea

He pleaded guilty to a crime FBI agents said he didn’t commit.

www.wsj.com

by his own words, you fucking twit....

In court, Mike Flynn walked back the suggestion he was tricked by the FBI

Donald Trump's one-time national security adviser told a judge he knew lying to the FBI was illegal, and his lawyer said he wasn't contending Flynn "was entrapped."

qz.com

 

[britbox]

Lol at all the squabbling over Flynn when the sitting US President has just pulled off one of the biggest clusterfuck moves in recent history. (sorry @Moxie, I'll get my coat).

 

[Federberg]

don't blame me. Blame the tin foil hat fkr…

So do you think this Iran thing is a wag the dog attempt?

 

[Moxie]

Lol at all the squabbling over Flynn when the sitting US President has just pulled off one of the biggest clusterfuck moves in recent history. (sorry @Moxie, I'll get my coat).

Hey! The only one who posted about Flynn since that broke is Cali.

 

[calitennis127]

Cali..Let’s change the narrative..what are you thoughts about former Gov of Ohio John Kasich..as you know my friend my politics are very far to the Left but I could see myself voting for someone like him if he was running who isn’t so far to the Right..

But Kasich really isn't on the right at all. There is a reason the New York Times endorsed him to be the Republican nominee. They basically saw him as a Democrat with an R next to his name.

Kasich would probably be a decent economic president. He has managed Ohio's economy well. But other than that he is basically a male version of Hillary Clinton.