Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

DOJ drops all charges against Michael Flynn!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
    Is that an admission that you recognize that your side cheats, is cheating? Sounds like it, CP.
    It's not the least bit surprising that you would screw that up so badly, Jim.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      Did you even bother to read the source? That was the excuse they came up with AFTER Papadopoulos outsmarted them by leaving the incriminating cash with a lawyer friend in Greece.

      I've said this before, but it's worth repeating: none of this is guesswork or speculation. We know for fact how it all went down.
      Papadopolous admitted to lying to the FBI in the Jan. 2017 interview, MM. It's not an excuse. That's what he did, thats why he was arrested. Who cares if someone gave him $10,000, that's not against the law.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by DivineBoob View Post
        But it's not a crime to receive $10k. So what would the crime have been if he had the money on him?

        And he admitted that he received the money so why would he need to have the money on him when they arrested him? Why can't they just arrest him now?

        Totally lost on this one.
        I can tell you didn't bother to read the article I cited.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • Now this is verrrrrry interesting... when was the last time you ever heard of a judge hiring a lawyer to defend a courtroom decision?

          The Washington Post headline reads (emphasis mine): “Federal judge hires high-powered D.C. attorney to defend his actions in Flynn case.” Which gives some insight into the framework and purpose of this event, and how it reached the WaPo narrative engineers.

          [...]

          I’m not going into the weeds to outline the motives of of Beth Wilkinson [the attorney hired by Sullivan]. Suffice to say the reason she is considered ‘high-profile’ or ‘high-powered’ is because of her connections to the DC system; a political system that frequently becomes enmeshed with the legal system. Beth Wilkinson is well-connected; that’s the part that matters.

          A federal judge hiring a well connected lawyer to write his response to a DC circuit court appeals panel is the part that’s interesting. There’s no guarantee the appeals court will accept such a response; but that’s also another issue. Bottom line: Judge Sullivan is importing a lawyer to represent his interests. Very unusual.

          [...]

          On November 30th, 2017, Mike Flynn signed a guilty plea; ostensibly admitting lying to investigators. The plea was accepted by Judge Rudolph “Rudy” Contreras; who is also a FISA court judge. Six days later, December 7, 2017, Judge Contreras “was recused” from the case without explanation.

          If the conflict -which required recusal- existed on December 7, 2017, wouldn’t that same conflict have existed days earlier on November 30th?

          The same DC circuit now ordering Judge Sullivan to explain his decision-making, is the same DC circuit that previously recused and replaced Judge Contreras from the Flynn case. None of this, including the specific tone of the panel in their order, is disconnected from the larger background.

          So when we take everything in total, the decision by Sullivan to hire a high-profile and well connected DC lawyer to represent his interests in the Flynn case…. well, it looks to me like Sullivan just hired himself a defense attorney.

          https://theconservativetreehouse.com...in-flynn-case/

          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            I can tell you didn't bother to read the article I cited.
            I read the first one, I didn't read that one. So I read it (If you promise me the video answers some of these questions then I'll watch that too). What I read didn't really explain much though.

            1) He admits to receiving the money. How does him failing to physically bring it here let him off the hook since they have his confession?
            2) Why does he need to physically bring the money here for it to be a FARA violation (not laundering)? He admits he took ownership of the money and they have the testimony of whoever it was in Israel!
            3) If he was paid money as part of a "sting" wouldn't the serial numbers on the money be all it took to establish where it came from? Why would it have to be "marked"?
            4) Why didn't he just not agree to illegally represent Israel's interests if he suspected something? How do you "entrap" someone into entering into willingly entering into an illegal business agreement? Entrapment is a fairly narrow thing and not at all like "If you don't tell me you're a cop then it's entrapment."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DivineBoob View Post
              I read the first one, I didn't read that one. So I read it (If you promise me the video answers some of these questions then I'll watch that too). What I read didn't really explain much though.

              1) He admits to receiving the money. How does him failing to physically bring it here let him off the hook since they have his confession?
              2) Why does he need to physically bring the money here for it to be a FARA violation (not laundering)? He admits he took ownership of the money and they have the testimony of whoever it was in Israel!
              3) If he was paid money as part of a "sting" wouldn't the serial numbers on the money be all it took to establish where it came from? Why would it have to be "marked"?
              4) Why didn't he just not agree to illegally represent Israel's interests if he suspected something? How do you "entrap" someone into entering into willingly entering into an illegal business agreement? Entrapment is a fairly narrow thing and not at all like "If you don't tell me you're a cop then it's entrapment."
              Again, you obviously didn't read the article. Here's a key paragraph:

              That operational collapse is why the FBI agents were “scrambling” at the airport and why they had no pre-existing criminal complaint. The DOJ couldn’t get a warrant because they couldn’t tell a judge their suspect was traveling with $10k from Israel because the judge would ask how they knew that.

              The set-up was that the FBI was going to "discover" a large amount of undeclared cash in Papadopolous' luggage. This would have given the FBI grounds to arrest him since this "discovery" wouldn't have required a warrant. They jumped the gun and arrested him in anticipation of the evidence being "discovered", only Pap smelled a rat and had left the money out of the country. Now what? The FBI couldn't very well charge him with any crimes connected to the money because how could they convince a judge that they had arrested him based on reasonable suspicion when there was literally no evidence? So then they had come up with some other charge to give themselves an out, and I'm pretty sure you know the rest.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Again, you obviously didn't read the article. Here's a key paragraph:

                That operational collapse is why the FBI agents were “scrambling” at the airport and why they had no pre-existing criminal complaint. The DOJ couldn’t get a warrant because they couldn’t tell a judge their suspect was traveling with $10k from Israel because the judge would ask how they knew that.

                The set-up was that the FBI was going to "discover" a large amount of undeclared cash in Papadopolous' luggage. This would have given the FBI grounds to arrest him since this "discovery" wouldn't have required a warrant. They jumped the gun and arrested him in anticipation of the evidence being "discovered", only Pap smelled a rat and had left the money out of the country. Now what? The FBI couldn't very well charge him with any crimes connected to the money because how could they convince a judge that they had arrested him based on reasonable suspicion when there was literally no evidence? So then they had come up with some other charge to give themselves an out, and I'm pretty sure you know the rest.
                Really, MM. And what was the FBI's reason for detaining and searching his luggage for the money in the first place if they had nothing else on him. He lied to the FBI in January you goof! They didn't have to scramble to figure out what to charge him with.
                Last edited by JimL; 05-23-2020, 11:33 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  Again, you obviously didn't read the article. Here's a key paragraph:

                  That operational collapse is why the FBI agents were “scrambling” at the airport and why they had no pre-existing criminal complaint. The DOJ couldn’t get a warrant because they couldn’t tell a judge their suspect was traveling with $10k from Israel because the judge would ask how they knew that.

                  The set-up was that the FBI was going to "discover" a large amount of undeclared cash in Papadopolous' luggage. This would have given the FBI grounds to arrest him since this "discovery" wouldn't have required a warrant. They jumped the gun and arrested him in anticipation of the evidence being "discovered", only Pap smelled a rat and had left the money out of the country. Now what? The FBI couldn't very well charge him with any crimes connected to the money because how could they convince a judge that they had arrested him based on reasonable suspicion when there was literally no evidence? So then they had come up with some other charge to give themselves an out, and I'm pretty sure you know the rest.
                  Your link says this


                  #1) Papadopoulos was lured to Israel and paid in Israel to give the outline of a FARA premise (ie. Papadopoulos is an agent of Israel). #2) Bringing $10,000 (or more) in cash into the U.S., without reporting, is a violation of U.S. treasury laws. Add into that aspect the FARA violation and the money can be compounded into #3) laundering charges.

                  The key aspect is the FARA violation. As we have seen in the EDVA case against Flynn’s partner Bijan Rafiekian, the DOJ-NSD bizarre interpretation of FARA laws create a violation from any unregistered purposeful business contact with a foreign entity.

                  Note how even if Papadopoulos didn’t have the full $10k, the DOJ-NSD would only have lost the treasury violation…. they could still have used any substantial amount of money to charge the FARA part of the business arrangement by questioning Papadopoulos about where he gained the cash from.



                  It is not a crime to travel with < $10K cash without declaring it. If he had come back with only, say, $5k there would have been no basis to question him at all. Your alleged explanation only makes sense if he is caught with the full $10k. And what if he just deposited the $10k into the bank while in Greece. Then he just gets to keep the money? You clearly don't understand your own link.

                  And your explanation makes no sense. If they couldn't tell a judge why they expected Big Daddy P to have the cash on him then clearly that evidence must be compromised and would not have been admissible during a trial. And surely P's lawyers would have let him know that immediately so it wouldn't work to trick him into a confession or flipping or anything else either.

                  Nor have you explained why any of this would involve *marked* money.

                  This whole thing is just so far fetched.
                  Last edited by DivineOb; 05-24-2020, 12:06 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DivineOb View Post
                    Your link says this


                    #1) Papadopoulos was lured to Israel and paid in Israel to give the outline of a FARA premise (ie. Papadopoulos is an agent of Israel). #2) Bringing $10,000 (or more) in cash into the U.S., without reporting, is a violation of U.S. treasury laws. Add into that aspect the FARA violation and the money can be compounded into #3) laundering charges.

                    The key aspect is the FARA violation. As we have seen in the EDVA case against Flynn’s partner Bijan Rafiekian, the DOJ-NSD bizarre interpretation of FARA laws create a violation from any unregistered purposeful business contact with a foreign entity.

                    Note how even if Papadopoulos didn’t have the full $10k, the DOJ-NSD would only have lost the treasury violation…. they could still have used any substantial amount of money to charge the FARA part of the business arrangement by questioning Papadopoulos about where he gained the cash from.



                    It is not a crime to travel with < $10K cash without declaring it. If he had come back with only, say, $5k there would have been no basis to question him at all. Your alleged explanation only makes sense if he is caught with the full $10k. And what if he just deposited the $10k into the bank while in Greece. Then he just gets to keep the money? You clearly don't understand your own link.

                    And your explanation makes no sense. If they couldn't tell a judge why they expected Big Daddy P to have the cash on him then clearly that evidence must be compromised and would not have been admissible during a trial. And surely P's lawyers would have let him know that immediately so it wouldn't work to trick him into a confession or flipping or anything else either.

                    Nor have you explained why any of this would invovle *marked* money.

                    This whole thing is just so far fetched.
                    Always have to take into account that "fake news" Breitbart is MM's major source of news.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      Always have to take into account that "fake news" Breitbart is MM's major source of news.
                      Of course. What I find so disappointing is how none of it holds up under even the lightest scrutiny. These people are adults yet they swallow these absurd conspiracy theories rather than just admit that they were taken in by a swindle and cut their losses.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DivineOb View Post
                        Of course. What I find so disappointing is how none of it holds up under even the lightest scrutiny. These people are adults yet they swallow these absurd conspiracy theories rather than just admit that they were taken in by a swindle and cut their losses.
                        Yep, unfortunately there seems to be a whole lot of credulous people out there these days and so many conspiracy theories to take them in.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          Yep, unfortunately there seems to be a whole lot of credulous people out there these days and so many conspiracy theories to take them in.
                          Like the Collusion Delusion, the Ukrainian Shakedown, and a whole slew of others just like it -- many of which have threads devoted to them here

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • yep, unfortunately there seems to be a whole lot of credulous people out there these days and so many conspiracy theories to take them in.
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            Like the Collusion Delusion, the Ukrainian Shakedown, and a whole slew of others just like it -- many of which have threads devoted to them here
                            Exibit A.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              Like the Collusion Delusion, the Ukrainian Shakedown, and a whole slew of others just like it -- many of which have threads devoted to them here
                              Rogue,

                              If UKR was a total fabrication why did Romney vote to convict? Just because he felt like throwing his career away? Remember he's got his eyes on another run for the presidency and will have to explain his vote time and again if he does so.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by DivineBoob View Post
                                Your link says this


                                #1) Papadopoulos was lured to Israel and paid in Israel to give the outline of a FARA premise (ie. Papadopoulos is an agent of Israel). #2) Bringing $10,000 (or more) in cash into the U.S., without reporting, is a violation of U.S. treasury laws. Add into that aspect the FARA violation and the money can be compounded into #3) laundering charges.

                                The key aspect is the FARA violation. As we have seen in the EDVA case against Flynn’s partner Bijan Rafiekian, the DOJ-NSD bizarre interpretation of FARA laws create a violation from any unregistered purposeful business contact with a foreign entity.

                                Note how even if Papadopoulos didn’t have the full $10k, the DOJ-NSD would only have lost the treasury violation…. they could still have used any substantial amount of money to charge the FARA part of the business arrangement by questioning Papadopoulos about where he gained the cash from.



                                It is not a crime to travel with < $10K cash without declaring it. If he had come back with only, say, $5k there would have been no basis to question him at all. Your alleged explanation only makes sense if he is caught with the full $10k. And what if he just deposited the $10k into the bank while in Greece. Then he just gets to keep the money? You clearly don't understand your own link.

                                And your explanation makes no sense. If they couldn't tell a judge why they expected Big Daddy P to have the cash on him then clearly that evidence must be compromised and would not have been admissible during a trial. And surely P's lawyers would have let him know that immediately so it wouldn't work to trick him into a confession or flipping or anything else either.

                                Nor have you explained why any of this would involve *marked* money.

                                This whole thing is just so far fetched.
                                Is this that thing you do where you pretend to be stupid and hope your opponent will trip himself up trying to explain it to you? Or perhaps you're not pretending. Either way, this isn't complicated:

                                1) Intelligence agencies arranged for Papadopolous to be given a large sum of cash that they expected him to naively bring with him into the US.
                                2) The plan was for this cash to be "discovered" as part of the normal customs screening process because this is done without a warrant. They didn't care if he had only a portion of the cash with him, because that would have still made it plausible enough to sit him down under a hot light and squeeze a "confession" out of him. But it was necessary they "discover" physical evidence on his person or in his luggage in order for the scheme to work.
                                3) It turns out that Papadopolous isn't an idiot and left the cash with a lawyer friend in Greece.
                                4) The FBI screwed up and arrested him before they realized there was no incriminating evidence to be "discovered". How do you explain that to a judge? "But, your honor, we only arrested him because we expected him to have the evidence we planted! It's not our fault he outsmarted us!"

                                So in the end, the FBI had to scramble to cover up their busted sting, and so Papadopolous was slapped with a nothing-burger "lying to investigators" charge and served something like 10-days in jail (although considering how hot his wife is, 10-days away from her could be considered cruel and unusual punishment).
                                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                413 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                383 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X