Russia Investigation - Flynn's fault

[ballsofsteel]

The whole Russia probe fiasco was/is Flynn's fault. Flynn pleaded guilty finally today to lying to the FBI, a felony.
The white house stated that this was all on Flynn and there is no connection to the white house. When Flynn was leaving the court house the crowd was chanting, "lock him up". Do they still hang people for treason? Anyway trump
is in the clear and was right about the liberal democrats obstructing him. Hopefully things get back to normal now.

[GMDino]

(12-01-2017, 05:18 PM)ballsofsteel Wrote: The whole Russia probe fiasco was/is Flynn's fault. Flynn pleaded guilty finally today to lying to the FBI, a felony.
The white house stated that this was all on Flynn and there is no connection to the white house. When Flynn was leaving the court house the crowd was chanting, "lock him up". Do they still hang people for treason? Anyway trump
is in the clear and was right about the liberal democrats obstructing him. Hopefully things get back to normal now.

[JustWinBaby]

Well, he violated the Logan Act (which no one has ever been prosecuted for), but then lied about it to the FBI.

And Kushner apparently directed Flynn to make those overtures, so I suppose this might all be Jared's fault.

[SunsetBengal]

(12-01-2017, 06:44 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Well, he violated the Logan Act (which no one has ever been prosecuted for), but then lied about it to the FBI.

And Kushner apparently directed Flynn to make those overtures, so I suppose this might all be Jared's fault.

Many would be happy to see a slum lord like Kushner go down hard.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(12-01-2017, 06:44 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Well, he violated the Logan Act (which no one has ever been prosecuted for), but then lied about it to the FBI.

And Kushner apparently directed Flynn to make those overtures, so I suppose this might all be Jared's fault.

Gotta love some of these old Acts that have been dug up the last year+ out of obscurity.

First it was people throwing around the term Hatch Act against a Democrat like it was just always in their common knowledge vocabulary, and now the Logan Act against a Republican.

I would love to wind back time and preemptively take a poll around the country to test for knowledge about both of those terms.

[Belsnickel]

(12-01-2017, 06:44 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Well, he violated the Logan Act (which no one has ever been prosecuted for), but then lied about it to the FBI.

And Kushner apparently directed Flynn to make those overtures, so I suppose this might all be Jared's fault.

Yeah, it's doubtful he violated the Logan Act when you really dig into it. They likely have other things on him that he could get nailed with that are unrelated to the whole thing (the Turkey stuff, for instance). I think they are trying to build the obstruction case, more than anything.

[treee]

(12-01-2017, 05:18 PM)ballsofsteel Wrote: is in the clear and was right about the liberal democrats obstructing him. Hopefully things get back to normal now.

And what do you call the Republicans behavior in the federal government between the years 2008-2016?

[Bengalzona]

(12-01-2017, 06:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, it's doubtful he violated the Logan Act when you really dig into it. They likely have other things on him that he could get nailed with that are unrelated to the whole thing (the Turkey stuff, for instance). I think they are trying to build the obstruction case, more than anything.

I heard on NPR that there were some issues with Flynn, money and Russians. They either weren't specific, or I missed part of it.

[Dill]

(12-01-2017, 06:54 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Gotta love some of these old Acts that have been dug up the last year+ out of obscurity.

First it was people throwing around the term Hatch Act against a Democrat like it was just always in their common knowledge vocabulary, and now the Logan Act against a Republican.

I would love to wind back time and preemptively take a poll around the country to test for knowledge about both of those terms.

For people who deal with politics on a daily basis, these acts are not so obscure.

For the rest of us, the silver lining of the Trump presidency is that people are learning all kinds of things about the separation of powers and "grey areas" of the Constitution that no one had paid much attention to before because their potential violation seemed unimaginable.

Then before Trump was even sworn in everyone was researching the "emoluments" clause.  A few months into his presidency, it was the 25th Amendment.

[Au165]

Kushner probably doesn't get nailed on the Logan act, but I'm sure Flynn will contradict official statements Kushner gave to Mueller during the investigation. This will be an issue where the cover up was worse than the crime.....then Trump will pardon him.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-01-2017, 09:00 PM)treee Wrote: And what do you call the Republicans behavior in the federal government between the years 2008-2016?

You're arguing with sarcasm.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-01-2017, 05:18 PM)ballsofsteel Wrote: The whole Russia probe fiasco was/is Flynn's fault. Flynn pleaded guilty finally today to lying to the FBI, a felony.
The white house stated that this was all on Flynn and there is no connection to the white house. When Flynn was leaving the court house the crowd was chanting, "lock him up". Do they still hang people for treason? Anyway trump
is in the clear and was right about the liberal democrats obstructing him. Hopefully things get back to normal now.

You can be executed for it.  Of course nobody is even investigating any treasonous acts so the likelihood is quite low.

[hollodero]

(12-04-2017, 11:52 AM)michaelsean Wrote: You can be executed for it.  Of course nobody is even investigating any treasonous acts so the likelihood is quite low.

Well... there is some undermining of a sitting government in play. I don't know - sincerely - if talking to Russians about behaviour in the UN council that goes against the current administration's goals is treasonous (or if my words really represent what happened.) But just glancing at it, isn't there some argument for treason?

[*michaelsean*]

(12-04-2017, 12:00 PM)hollodero Wrote: Well... there is some undermining of a sitting government in play. I don't know - sincerely - if talking to Russians about behaviour in the UN council that goes against the current administration's goals is treasonous (or if my words really represent what happened.) But just glancing at it, isn't there some argument for treason?

No.  It's very specific here.  The other country has to be an enemy.  Not a rival, an actual enemy.  As in war or at least armed conflict.  And then you have to give them aid in some way that assists them in that war.  Espionage is usually the crime when people claim treason.

Also an attempt to overthrow the government, but it can't just be planning to, you have to actually have fielded an army for that purpose.

[hollodero]

(12-04-2017, 12:06 PM)michaelsean Wrote: No.  It's very specific here.  The other country has to be an enemy.  Not a rival, an actual enemy.  As in war or at least armed conflict.  And then you have to give them aid in some way that assists them in that war.  Espionage is usually the crime when   people claim treason.

Also an attempt to overthrow the government, but it can't just be planning to, you have to actually have fielded an army for that purpose.

Alright, got it, thanks. So no treason then.

But what should be used for that specific Flynn deed other than "violating the Logan Act", in common non-legislative words. To me it looks like more or less secretly undermining an official foreign policy effort effort still. So it's not treason, does that mean it's nothing?
I mean, no matter how seldom this Logan Act is referred to, it still seems like a piece of legislation whose existence makes perfect sense. And this one I checked, it's not about enemies.

I just ask you so I don't have to ask CNN :) I belief this whole Kysliak talking to be a a marginal piece of it all anyway. Still, perfectly OK is not the evaluation I have in mind. How do you see it.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-04-2017, 12:38 PM)hollodero Wrote: Alright, got it, thanks. So no treason then.

But what should be used for that specific Flynn deed other than "violating the Logan Act", in common non-legislative words. To me it looks like more or less secretly undermining an official foreign policy effort effort still. So it's not treason, does that mean it's nothing?
I mean, no matter how seldom this Logan Act is referred to, it still seems like a piece of legislation whose existence makes perfect sense. And this one I checked, it's not about enemies.

I just ask you so I don't have to ask CNN :) I belief this whole Kysliak talking to be a a marginal piece of it all anyway. Still, perfectly OK is not the evaluation I have in mind. How do you see it.

There's lots of crimes you can violate that aren't treason.  I don't know the specific ones involved here.  Conspiracy to commit theft if they are linked to Hillary's emails?   There is nothing illegal in itself with talking to Russians until you start discussing policy etc. That's where this apparently never used Logan Act seems to come into play.  

[hollodero]

(12-04-2017, 01:10 PM)michaelsean Wrote: There's lots of crimes you can violate that aren't treason.  I don't know the specific ones involved here.  Conspiracy to commit theft if they are linked to Hillary's emails?   There is nothing illegal in itself with talking to Russians until you start discussing policy etc. That's where this apparently never used Logan Act seems to come into play.  

But that's obviously what happened with Flynn. Talking about policy with Kislyak, about the Russians postponing an UN security council vote. Which was not in the interest of the administration in charge. Enforced or never enforced, I feel it makes sense that this is a violation of sorts. The existence of a Logan Act makes sense.
I get it's not treason, you laid that one out for me quite clearly. I believe that. I wasn't in favour of hanging anyone, anyway.

In the whole scope, there possibly is way more than that, sure. To me it seems more likely than not that the Hillary email theft, or at least the publication afterwards, was orchestrated with Team Trump. Which possibly is ethically reprehensible, but not a crime, as far as Trump defenders claim. I don't know of course.

[treee]

(12-04-2017, 11:51 AM)michaelsean Wrote: You're arguing with sarcasm.

Negative. Just want to see what you call it.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-04-2017, 01:28 PM)hollodero Wrote: But that's obviously what happened with Flynn. Talking about policy with Kislyak, about the Russians postponing an UN security council vote. Which was not in the interest of the administration in charge. Enforced or never enforced, I feel it makes sense that this is a violation of sorts. The existence of a Logan Act makes sense.
I get it's not treason, you laid that one out for me quite clearly. I believe that. I wasn't in favour of hanging anyone, anyway.

In the whole scope, there possibly is way more than that, sure. To me it seems more likely than not that the Hillary email theft, or at least the publication afterwards, was orchestrated with Team Trump. Which possibly is ethically reprehensible, but not a crime, as far as Trump defenders claim. I don't know of course.

No I agree that this Logan Act seems to fit if they are guilty.  It's just odd that it's never been used.  

[hollodero]

(12-04-2017, 01:46 PM)michaelsean Wrote: No I agree that this Logan Act seems to fit if they are guilty.  It's just odd that it's never been used.  

Yeah, it maybe is odd. Still using that "never used" phrase (I don't mean you, I mean the Trump defenders in general) to me seems like suggesting it's some ancient, out-dated rule and violating it was some kind of petty, trivial offense. It certainly doesn't look like that to me.