(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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?

(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.

(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.

(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?

(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.

(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.

(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.  

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

(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.

(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.