REEEEE: PussyGate, a Collection of Trump Investigations - page 11.

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: TECSHARE on May 05, 2020, 09:17:59 PM

Once again, the federal conviction rate is 98%.

As of 2018, 90% of those facing federal charges plead guilty, 8% have their case dismissed, 2% go to trial.

Of the 2% that go to trial, 83% are found guilty by a jury (or occasionally a judge if they waive their right to trial by jury)

You aren't going to face federal charges unless there is overwhelming evidence that you're guilty and the DOJ is confident they can convince a jury to vote unanimously to convict.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 05, 2020, 09:02:37 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 09:00:11 PM

Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not?

We don't know what really happened.

But, have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate and plead guilty to lesser charges only if they didnt charge his son?

I already posted a link showing such a thing is exactly one of the prohibited items; thus a valid cause for reversal of a guilty plea in a plea bargain.

You ignored it and kept trudging down the same path.

If you seriously want to discuss the Flynn case, you really need to understand the legal concepts involved, and keep up to date with the case.

Either you are delusional or you are 2 years in the past. WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING is that Flynn is using valid, standard legal technques to overthrow a guilty plea. What part of that do you not understand?

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 05, 2020, 09:02:37 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 09:00:11 PM

Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not?

We don't know what really happened.

But, have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate and plead guilty to lesser charges only if they didnt charge his son?

Once again, the federal conviction rate is 98%. Guilty or innocent, it would have ruined his son's life. Also, there is the little matter of the fact that they aren't allowed to do this by policy, but they did it anyway. Please do engage in more of your tu quoque fallacies though. They seem to be your favorite reply after "CONSPIRACY SITES! CONSPIRACY SITES!".

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 09:00:11 PM

Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not?

We don't know what really happened.

But, have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate and plead guilty to lesser charges only if they didnt charge his son?

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 05, 2020, 08:40:23 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 08:35:32 PM

Quote from: dupeddonk on May 05, 2020, 07:02:24 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 06:43:23 AM

Plea was not made voluntarily, or was entered without knowledge of the charge or sentence.

do you ever read things that might disprove what u thinks is true?

THE COURT: Do you wish to challenge the circumstances on
which you were interviewed by the FBI?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you understand that by maintaining your
guilty plea and continuing with sentencing, you will give up your
right forever to challenge the circumstances under which you were
interviewed?
FLYNN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have any concerns that you entered your
guilty plea before you or your attorneys were able to review
information that could have been helpful to your defense?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: At the time of your January 24th, 2017
interview with the FBI, were you not aware that lying to FBI
investigators was a federal crime?
FLYNN: I was aware.
THE COURT: You were aware?
FLYNN: Yeah.

Sure. What part of the two elements I bolded have anything to do with your list?

How about you?Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not?

Does that sound like it's okay in your internal system of judgement? It doesn't bother Twitch, that's certain.

how do u know they threatened to charge is son?

maybe he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate only if they didnt charge him.

You don't seem to have any problem making assumptions when it comes to Flynn being a victim, but when presented when facts and evidence of him being guilty...totally different story.

You are completely deluded. Let me explain.

I am only describing the reality of a case, in which D is seeking to have a guilty plea overturned, and in which he has multiple methods in law to do so. It is what it is.

You would opinionate on why he's guilty, without even caring about the nature of the problem. Of course we know you believe "Orange Man Bad" and "Friends of Orange Man Bad". The reversal of the plea will be handled in court.

Does he have a good chance that his strategy will work?

I'm just an observer of this, not an influencer.

You believe you influence opinion by posting on the internet. In doing your little job there you've been fronting a great deal of mis information, mis direction and outright lying.

Have fun at it, but don't you think you might need to go back to self moderated threads?

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 08:35:32 PM

Quote from: dupeddonk on May 05, 2020, 07:02:24 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 06:43:23 AM

Plea was not made voluntarily, or was entered without knowledge of the charge or sentence.

do you ever read things that might disprove what u thinks is true?

THE COURT: Do you wish to challenge the circumstances on
which you were interviewed by the FBI?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you understand that by maintaining your
guilty plea and continuing with sentencing, you will give up your
right forever to challenge the circumstances under which you were
interviewed?
FLYNN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have any concerns that you entered your
guilty plea before you or your attorneys were able to review
information that could have been helpful to your defense?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: At the time of your January 24th, 2017
interview with the FBI, were you not aware that lying to FBI
investigators was a federal crime?
FLYNN: I was aware.
THE COURT: You were aware?
FLYNN: Yeah.

Sure. What part of the two elements I bolded have anything to do with your list?

How about you?Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not?

Does that sound like it's okay in your internal system of judgement? It doesn't bother Twitch, that's certain.

how do u know they threatened to charge is son?

maybe he knew his son committed crimes and said he would cooperate only if they didnt charge him.

You don't seem to have any problem making assumptions when it comes to Flynn being a victim, but when presented when facts and evidence of him being guilty...totally different story.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: dupeddonk on May 05, 2020, 07:02:24 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 06:43:23 AM

Plea was not made voluntarily, or was entered without knowledge of the charge or sentence.

do you ever read things that might disprove what u thinks is true?

THE COURT: Do you wish to challenge the circumstances on
which you were interviewed by the FBI?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you understand that by maintaining your
guilty plea and continuing with sentencing, you will give up your
right forever to challenge the circumstances under which you were
interviewed?
FLYNN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have any concerns that you entered your
guilty plea before you or your attorneys were able to review
information that could have been helpful to your defense?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: At the time of your January 24th, 2017
interview with the FBI, were you not aware that lying to FBI
investigators was a federal crime?
FLYNN: I was aware.
THE COURT: You were aware?
FLYNN: Yeah.

Your excerpt of the court transcript is simply part of the standard sentencing question and answer. The question posed was when and in what circumstances a guilty plea can be reversed and why. This is an event AFTER the trial.

How about you?Have you considered Flynn's pleading guilty after the FBI agents threatened to charge is son if he did not? That is the very definition of a plea not made voluntarily, isn't it?

Does that sound like it's okay in your internal system of judgement? It doesn't bother Twitch, that's certain.

dupeddonk

member

Activity: 189

Merit: 30

Quote from: Spendulus on May 05, 2020, 06:43:23 AM

Plea was not made voluntarily, or was entered without knowledge of the charge or sentence.

do you ever read things that might disprove what u thinks is true?

THE COURT: Do you wish to challenge the circumstances on
which you were interviewed by the FBI?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you understand that by maintaining your
guilty plea and continuing with sentencing, you will give up your
right forever to challenge the circumstances under which you were
interviewed?
FLYNN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have any concerns that you entered your
guilty plea before you or your attorneys were able to review
information that could have been helpful to your defense?
FLYNN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: At the time of your January 24th, 2017
interview with the FBI, were you not aware that lying to FBI
investigators was a federal crime?
FLYNN: I was aware.
THE COURT: You were aware?
FLYNN: Yeah.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: squatz1 on May 05, 2020, 12:41:49 AM

....
I assume that there's some legal precedent where if someone pulls back their plea, due to them not having correct advice from their legal counsel (or the best advice, that is), then investigators aren't allowed to use that information against them. I'm not a lawyer, and I assume most that are sitting on this forum aren't as well, but I can't see the point in retracting the plea and your negotiating tactic without this being the case.

Republicans on the judiciary committe have already expressed the fact that they want testimony to begin regarding this case. (Not surprising, but still)

This is a perfect case to just throw out of court, or declare a mistrial, in the interests of justice alone. I've bolded the issues in Flynn's guilty plea that separate it from a guilty plea bargain made in good faith.

If made in a timely manner, courts generally will allow plea withdrawals after sentencing for the following conditions (this is not an exhaustive list):

Defendant was denied effective assistance of legal counsel, as guaranteed by law.
The plea was not entered by the defendant or anyone authorized to act on their behalf.
Plea was not made voluntarily, or was entered without knowledge of the charge or sentence.
Defendant did not receive the concessions agreed to in the plea deal.
Defendant entered a guilty plea under the judge-approved condition that it could be withdrawn if the court rejected the agreed-upon conditions of the plea.
Defendant entered a guilty as the result of promises or threats made off-the-record (assuming they can be proven).
It's simply not enough to claim dissatisfaction with the outcome of the sentencing hearing, assuming it didn't result in a miscarriage of justice. But even without the defendant's request, a judge is required to set aside a guilty plea when there is strong evidence (perhaps latent DNA test results) of the defendant's innocence.

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/withdrawing-a-guilty-plea-after-sentencing.html

There is a real problem here that the prosecution with held evidence favorable to Flynn. They are not allowed to do that.

The Brady Rule, named after Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), requires prosecutors to disclose materially exculpatory evidence in the government's possession to the defense. A "Brady material" or evidence the prosecutor is required to disclose under this rule includes any evidence favorable to the accused--evidence that goes towards negating a defendant's guilt, that would reduce a defendant's potential sentence, or evidence going to the credibility of a witness.

..... in cases subsequent to Brady, the Supreme Court has eliminated the requirement for a defendant to have requested a favorable information, stating that the Prosecution has a constitutional duty to disclose, that is triggered by the potential impact of favorable but undisclosed evidence

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule

Twich has attempted to argue that the prosecution revealing their evidence wasn't necessary because the case didn't go to trial, but it most certainly did go to trial. In fact, he'd like to argue simultaneously that Flynn was "a convicted felon" and the case "didn't go to trial."

squatz1

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1285

Flying Hellfish is a Commie

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 04, 2020, 08:44:49 PM

Quote from: Viper1 on May 04, 2020, 06:21:47 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 07:49:42 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 03:48:29 PM

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on? It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm really surprised after all this time that you think he's being honest or can have a rational debate with anyone on this sort of subject. He's just better at appearing more "rational" then techshare. In case you haven't noticed, he will completely avoid admitting or agreeing to anything at all that might mean his point of view could be called into question or that he could be even remotely wrong. His "this isn't of interest to me" statement isn't being truthful. It's just another means of avoiding having to agree with you about anything or even remotely admit that something could be true that would in some way weaken his point of view. You're completely wasting your time attempting to have any sort of real debate with him. But maybe you just do it for entertainment purposes in which case carry on man.

We had a similar discussion about global warming (he thinks global cooling is more of a threat). I think the way he responds is interesting. He went from I don't understand => I need more evidence => I still don't know anything => I don't care/troll. Is he just arguing in bad faith, or is he genuinely convinced that his thought process is rational? We'll never know.

Quote from: squatz1 on May 04, 2020, 08:07:15 PM

Just to comment on the lawyer part, I'm pretty sure that there he was able to leave the plea deal due to him saying he got bad guidance from a lawyer -- or something along those lines. Yeah, here's the article from the WSJ

I don't think he's actually been able to retract his guilty plea. If he does though, I think it will be due to the DOJ prosecutors failing to produce the investigator notes (brady act) rather than anything the FBI or his lawyer did.

It's a pretty interesting situation if he does though. Will all charges be back on the table? If so, it seems like he'd just end up in the same spot he was in before accepting the deal, except he won't have cooperating with Mueller as a bargaining chip and he's already admitted guilt to the whole Turkey

His new lawyer, Sidney Powell is quite the character though. Sells some funny t-shirts on her site https://sidneypowell.com/shop/apparel/creepsonamission-shirt/

I assume that there's some legal precedent where if someone pulls back their plea, due to them not having correct advice from their legal counsel (or the best advice, that is), then investigators aren't allowed to use that information against them. I'm not a lawyer, and I assume most that are sitting on this forum aren't as well, but I can't see the point in retracting the plea and your negotiating tactic without this being the case.

Sideny Powell - More information from him regarding the whole Flynn thing, could be a bombshell - https://twitter.com/SidneyPowell1/status/1257385657124741123?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Republicans on the judiciary committe have already expressed the fact that they want testimony to begin regarding this case. (Not surprising, but still)

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Viper1 on May 04, 2020, 06:21:47 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 07:49:42 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 03:48:29 PM

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on? It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm really surprised after all this time that you think he's being honest or can have a rational debate with anyone on this sort of subject. He's just better at appearing more "rational" then techshare. In case you haven't noticed, he will completely avoid admitting or agreeing to anything at all that might mean his point of view could be called into question or that he could be even remotely wrong. His "this isn't of interest to me" statement isn't being truthful. It's just another means of avoiding having to agree with you about anything or even remotely admit that something could be true that would in some way weaken his point of view. You're completely wasting your time attempting to have any sort of real debate with him. But maybe you just do it for entertainment purposes in which case carry on man.

We had a similar discussion about global warming (he thinks global cooling is more of a threat). I think the way he responds is interesting. He went from I don't understand => I need more evidence => I still don't know anything => I don't care/troll. Is he just arguing in bad faith, or is he genuinely convinced that his thought process is rational? We'll never know.

Quote from: squatz1 on May 04, 2020, 08:07:15 PM

Just to comment on the lawyer part, I'm pretty sure that there he was able to leave the plea deal due to him saying he got bad guidance from a lawyer -- or something along those lines. Yeah, here's the article from the WSJ

I don't think he's actually been able to retract his guilty plea. If he does though, I think it will be due to the DOJ prosecutors failing to produce the investigator notes (brady act) rather than anything the FBI or his lawyer did.

It's a pretty interesting situation if he does though. Will all charges be back on the table? If so, it seems like he'd just end up in the same spot he was in before accepting the deal, except he won't have cooperating with Mueller as a bargaining chip and he's already admitted guilt to the whole Turkey

His new lawyer, Sidney Powell is quite the character though. Sells some funny t-shirts on her site https://sidneypowell.com/shop/apparel/creepsonamission-shirt/

squatz1

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1285

Flying Hellfish is a Commie

Quote from: TwitchySeal on April 30, 2020, 09:06:15 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on April 30, 2020, 06:37:37 AM

Now you show in the document you presented, where are the CRIMES THAT HE COMMITTED that he lied about?

Or was the crime the crime of lying? Big difference here.

He was being paid by Turkey to lobby the US gov on their behalf. He didn't file as a foreign agent within 10 days (felony), and when he did file 4 months later after he got caught, he lied on the Foreign Agent application and didn't include things that were required by law to include (felony).

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 30, 2020, 08:06:26 AM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on April 30, 2020, 12:49:54 AM

Do you think Flynn did these things: https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

Funny, with how much weight they are putting on what Flynn said, there is no actual transcript of what he actually said included. Interesting huh?

Yeah, maybe his lawyer is part of the deep state and they kidnapped his kids or something to force him to sign the statement of offence and plea deal.

Just to comment on the lawyer part, I'm pretty sure that there he was able to leave the plea deal due to him saying he got bad guidance from a lawyer -- or something along those lines. Yeah, here's the article from the WSJ

Quote from: https://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-flynns-lawyers-say-newly-unsealed-documents-show-fbi-tried-to-set-him-up-11588219544

Ms. Powell [his current lawyer] also accused his former team of providing Mr. Flynn with bad advice, and alleged government investigators had improperly pursued Mr. Flynn.

Quote

Nothing crazy, just wanted to include that his legal team from before is before is being scrutinized by his current legal team for what they helped him agree too. I do think that this may be thrown out do to what the FBI did though.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: Viper1 on May 04, 2020, 06:21:47 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 07:49:42 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 03:48:29 PM

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on? It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm really surprised after all this time that you think he's being honest or can have a rational debate with anyone on this sort of subject. He's just better at appearing more "rational" then techshare. In case you haven't noticed, he will completely avoid admitting or agreeing to anything at all that might mean his point of view could be called into question or that he could be even remotely wrong. His "this isn't of interest to me" statement isn't being truthful. ...

Sure it is, 100% truth. When someone repeats about same time the same mantra, this:

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

Such a course of action violates Rule 1 of Internet forums. Be interesting. Translated, don't think that the lying cunts of FBI agents who "interviewed Flynn" are a role model for your own behavior.

Viper1

sr. member

Activity: 686

Merit: 320

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 07:49:42 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 03:48:29 PM

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on? It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm really surprised after all this time that you think he's being honest or can have a rational debate with anyone on this sort of subject. He's just better at appearing more "rational" then techshare. In case you haven't noticed, he will completely avoid admitting or agreeing to anything at all that might mean his point of view could be called into question or that he could be even remotely wrong. His "this isn't of interest to me" statement isn't being truthful. It's just another means of avoiding having to agree with you about anything or even remotely admit that something could be true that would in some way weaken his point of view. You're completely wasting your time attempting to have any sort of real debate with him. But maybe you just do it for entertainment purposes in which case carry on man.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 04, 2020, 01:06:55 PM

....
Let's recap.

First you asked me to explain to you the Flynns crimes that didn't involve lying to the FBI.
So I did.

Then you said you needed to see more documents.
So I provided and explained them.

Then you said you had no idea about any of it.
So I broke it down into tiny bite sized chunks to make it easy to understand.

Then you said you really don't care about if the facts are true.
And now you troll.

I know you aren't a retard so it must be willful ignorance.

Sure, let's recap. I busted your pet theory about "Crimes" being FARA and LDA related about four different ways, then got tired of your "Do you believe A-B-C-D?" because let me assure you, that is exactly the type of through-a-soda-straw interrogation technique that the lying cunts of the FBI would use to entrap someone like Flynn.

You are an acknowledged believer in the rightness of Flynn's entrapment. You've repeatedly ignored all evidence and links to the contrary and obsessively continued with your "Do you believe..."

At some point, a rational person should expect to have others say in response to the "Do you believe.." mantra, something like "I don't care."

May I suggest that another option besides retard, and willful ignorance, would be "far more knowledgeable and conversant with the facts and issues than Twitch."

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 04, 2020, 01:06:55 PM

NO U!

Every shred of "evidence" you have presented has been shown to be fraudulent and based on nothing. You have the burden of proof here as the one making positive affirmations of guilt. You have no actual evidence, just accusations and fraud. Furthermore you refuse to acknowledge clear documentation of this fraud as sourced above while you continue to tout this fraudulent evidence as being credible and project your own willful ignorance on those presenting it.

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Spendulus on May 04, 2020, 09:37:13 AM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 04, 2020, 01:03:03 AM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 09:11:38 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 07:49:42 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 03:48:29 PM

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on? It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm sure the lying cunts of FBI agents who interviewed Flynn also told him they didn't have any "Trick Questions."

Right?

Na. When it comes to Flynns case I think it's possible the FBI did something shady, but I have yet to see any proof.

I'm pretty sure that the FBI agents contemplated what the goal of the interview was “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” which makes it pretty clear they knew Flynn was guilty when they interviewed him.

I'm also sure that Trump fired Flynn and said the reason was because Flynn lied to the Vice President.

I'm also sure that Flynn plead guilty (twice) to lying to the FBI and admitted to several other crimes in the process.

I'm also sure that there's tons of other evidence the proves Flynn is indeed a criminal.

I'm also sure that Flynn is a convicted felon.

In and of itself that's all fine. But the need to repeat these beliefs mantra-style before you have your Cheerios each morning is definite evidence of TDS. We can help you with that. Start by repeating to yourself silently (so that nobody can hear you) "Orange Man Good".

Let's recap.

First you asked me to explain to you the Flynns crimes that didn't involve lying to the FBI.
So I did.

Then you said you needed to see more documents.
So I provided and explained them.

Then you said you had no idea about any of it.
So I broke it down into tiny bite sized chunks to make it easy to understand.

Then you said you really don't care about if the facts are true.
And now you troll.

I know you aren't a retard so it must be willful ignorance.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 04, 2020, 01:03:03 AM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 09:11:38 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 07:49:42 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 03:48:29 PM

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on? It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm sure the lying cunts of FBI agents who interviewed Flynn also told him they didn't have any "Trick Questions."

Right?

Na. When it comes to Flynns case I think it's possible the FBI did something shady, but I have yet to see any proof.

I'm pretty sure that the FBI agents contemplated what the goal of the interview was “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” which makes it pretty clear they knew Flynn was guilty when they interviewed him.

I'm also sure that Trump fired Flynn and said the reason was because Flynn lied to the Vice President.

I'm also sure that Flynn plead guilty (twice) to lying to the FBI and admitted to several other crimes in the process.

I'm also sure that there's tons of other evidence the proves Flynn is indeed a criminal.

I'm also sure that Flynn is a convicted felon.

In and of itself that's all fine. But the need to repeat these beliefs mantra-style before you have your Cheerios each morning is definite evidence of TDS. We can help you with that. Start by repeating to yourself silently (so that nobody can hear you) "Orange Man Good".

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 04, 2020, 01:03:03 AM

Na. When it comes to Flynns case I think it's possible the FBI did something shady, but I have yet to see any proof.

I'm pretty sure that the FBI agents contemplated what the goal of the interview was “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” which makes it pretty clear they knew Flynn was guilty when they interviewed him.

I'm also sure that Trump fired Flynn and said the reason was because Flynn lied to the Vice President.

I'm also sure that Flynn plead guilty (twice) to lying to the FBI and admitted to several other crimes in the process.

I'm also sure that there's tons of other evidence the proves Flynn is indeed a criminal.

I'm also sure that Flynn is a convicted felon.

Proof, like official documents kind of proof? You mean like this?

"FBI reviewed Flynn’s calls with Russian ambassador but found nothing illicit"

https://outline.com/na7ffR

"Exculpatory Russia evidence about Mike Flynn that US intel kept secret"

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/423558-exculpatory-russia-evidence-about-mike-flynn-that-us-intel-kept-secret

"Michael Flynn and Sidney Powell Return to Court – Powell Confirms Rosenstein Authorized Targeting of Flynn Jr. for Leverage…"

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/09/10/michael-flynn-and-sidney-powell-return-to-court-powell-confirms-rosenstein-authorized-targeting-of-flynn-jr-for-leverage/comment-page-1/

"Strzok stopped FBI from ending Flynn probe despite lack of 'derogatory' evidence, unsealed documents reveal"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-stopped-bureau-from-ending-flynn-probe-despite-lack-of-derogatory-evidence-unsealed-documents-reveal

I am very glad you are so sure of yourself. Too bad you can't actually produce any of that "tons of other evidence" to support your personal belief in his guilt.

TwitchySeal

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 2093

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 09:11:38 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 07:49:42 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 03, 2020, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 03, 2020, 03:48:29 PM

....
How about we just go through and see what we can agree on? It's tough to have a rational discussion if we don't agree on what actually happened.

Flynn is CEO of FLYNN INTEL GROUP INC. (FIG), they filed under the LDA in Sept 2016 and FARA in March 2017.
On election day 2016 his op-ed Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support
From Sept-Nov 2016 FIG received ~$500k from Iovo, a company based in the Netherlands.

Do you believe these three statements to be true? This isn't a trick question.

I don't care if they are true. And this isn't a trick answer, because this is a subject of interest to you. But it isn't of interest to me.

Fair enough, I thought you did. Thanks for being honest.

I'm sure the lying cunts of FBI agents who interviewed Flynn also told him they didn't have any "Trick Questions."

Right?

Na. When it comes to Flynns case I think it's possible the FBI did something shady, but I have yet to see any proof.

I'm pretty sure that the FBI agents contemplated what the goal of the interview was “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” which makes it pretty clear they knew Flynn was guilty when they interviewed him.

I'm also sure that Trump fired Flynn and said the reason was because Flynn lied to the Vice President.

I'm also sure that Flynn plead guilty (twice) to lying to the FBI and admitted to several other crimes in the process.

I'm also sure that there's tons of other evidence the proves Flynn is indeed a criminal.

I'm also sure that Flynn is a convicted felon.

Topic: REEEEE: PussyGate, a Collection of Trump Investigations - page 11. (Read 4520 times)