Reply to Barr Installs Outside Prosecutor to Review Case Against Michael Flynn, Ex-Trump Adviser

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Barr Installs Outside Prosecutor to Review Case Against Michael Flynn, Ex-Trump Adviser"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.[/quote]

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings.   A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.
[/quote]

DP, but I have read it. It is literally nothing new. There is a reason the judge is troubled by it. You are reading way more into this whole episode and are missing the forest for the trees. There is a reason why so many of Flynn's conversations (as "masked American") raised concern with law enforcement, which prompted the multiple requests from different interested parties to release different Americans names (that all happened to be one person) - Flynn was:

- illegally making arrangements to sell US nuclear secrets to the Saudi's
- making arrangements to kidnap the Turkish cleric from Pennsylvania
-Coordinating a US vote to Israel's benefit contrary to US policy in 2016
-Coordinating US policy with Russia as it related to sanctions

All while under the payroll of the Turks, Saudi's and Israeli's without a FARA disclosure.

If the actual crimes here are nothing to you and you are more concerned about the potential of a missing 302 than all I can ask is why you support traitors and not US law enforcement.[/quote]

That is such BS.  Total BS.
There is no proof of the charges you are accusing him of.

And, [b]as incoming National Security Advisor, he had every right - and responsibility -  to speak to foreign diplomats.  [/quote][/b]

[b]It’s not our fault you don’t understand what is and what is not allowed under the law. [/[/b]quote]

But there is no evidence that he did what was charged--it's missing.  That is a problem.  There is evidence, however, that he was railroaded.  Why didn't the prosecution turn over the exculpatory evidence when asked?  Why did they withhold documents leaving it to another US Attorney to find?  After all, the SC had those documents.  Why weren't they shared?  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics