Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[TSA]

They have been linked in the thread. I am not going to cater to your poor reading skills, dimwit.

not going to cater
ok I’ll cater
transition team norms
election collusion
ignore feature
view post feature
total ignore feature

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Trump people have been cooperative, for the most part. Fusion GPS, Crowdstrike, and Platte River Networks? Not so much.

US media hysteria over Russia -- exactly what Putin wants.

MSM has been obsessed with Russia for months. Better not come up empty.

Lol, McCarthyism

Go for it

Get on with the investigation already. Let's see what they find.

Where's the beef?

A lot of people are going to have egg on their faces when this is all said and done. MSM will take another hit to their credibility.

These people have a diamond-cutting boner to take down the orange Manchuria candidate. If there was something there, it already would've been played.

I see the hunt for Red October is still going on.

[TSA]

Asha Rangappa, associate dean at Yale Law School.:

As for Trump, his knowledge of Flynn’s contacts with Russia (and other potentially illegal acts to which Flynn did not plead guilty) could not only tie him to the collusion case taking clearer shape, but also to the obstruction of justice case against the president specifically. After all, Trump’s main goal, starting with his initial meetings with former FBI Director James Comey, was to have the case against Flynn dropped. If Trump was knowingly trying to keep the FBI from discovering Flynn’s activities, that would seal the deal for Mueller’s obstruction case. For both collusion and obstruction, Flynn holds the key to who knew what when, and Mueller now has his cooperation.

Orin Kerr, professor of law, The George Washington University

Flynn’s plea brings the investigation much closer to the question of cooperation between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. We now know that there was a working relationship between the Trump transition and the Russian government in December 2016, just a month after the election. That raises the question: When did that working relationship start? And what was the scope of their cooperation? The person who knows that best may be Michael Flynn. And he’s now cooperating with the special counsel. That’s big.

Laurie Levenson, professor at Loyola Law School

Undoubtedly, Flynn’s plea is not the end of the road for this investigation. Rather, it is an opportunity to use Flynn’s status as an insider to explore who else close to the president participated in conversations with the Russians and the motivations for those conversations. Was there a deal to ease sanctions in exchange for Russians helping Trump get elected? Have others lied about their contacts (or lack of contacts) with foreign officials? We honestly don’t know how far this will go. However, given the lies and cover-up, there is still a lot of motivation for Mueller and his team to aggressively pursue all leads.

Richard Painter, professor of law at the University of Minnesota and former chief White House ethics lawyer under George W. Bush

Prosecutors don’t generally offer plea deals as generous as this one unless the defendant offers valuable information implicating someone higher up in the conspiracy than the defendant. Given that Flynn was very high up in the Trump campaign and in the White House, that means his testimony is likely to implicate someone of great importance. Mueller’s objective is to get that testimony in the record, and finish getting testimony from other witnesses, so that other indictments can be filed.

Alex Whiting, professor at Harvard Law School focusing on domestic and international criminal prosecution issues, and a former federal prosecutor

First, Flynn admits that when he spoke with Russian Ambassador Kislyak in December 2016, in violation of the Logan Act, about sanctions imposed on Russia and a vote concerning Israeli settlements, he did so under the direction of senior Trump transition team officials. It is difficult to believe that both Trump and Pence were unaware of Flynn’s interventions with the Russians. Second, it seems that Flynn got a very good deal today, indicating that he is offering extremely important information as part of his cooperation.
Of course, if Flynn fails to fulfill his end of the bargain and does not provide full cooperation, Mueller can tear up the agreement and charge him with all available crimes. But the fact that Mueller agreed to just one charge with a low penalty indicates that Flynn has a lot to offer.

David Sklansky, professor at Stanford Law School

This is a major development. Flynn has now admitted that he had direct conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about American sanctions, and about an important United Nations vote, in the closing weeks of the Obama administration, and that he then lied about those conversations when he was interviewed by the FBI. Moreover, the statement of facts that Mueller’s office filed in court in support of Flynn’s guilty plea makes clear that Flynn wasn’t flying solo: He kept other senior members of Trump transition team in the loop about his conversations with Kislyak, and some of those contacts were actually directed by someone the pleading describes as a “very senior member” of the Trump transition team.

Flynn’s testimony will be devastating in ways you haven’t imagined
+++
Godspeed

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Flynn’s testimony will be devastating in ways you haven’t imagined
+++
Godspeed

As opposed to Flynn's testimony is small potatoes?

All of them rebut your National Review guy that the deal is too small to be proof of anything significant. Oh and of course when googling your quote the top of the list is NR and 4chan.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Rent

you were posting in the thread and I responded. What you quoted was talking about your posts, dumbass.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If Mueller were prepared to settle the Flynn matter on the basis of single-count plea to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, he was almost certainly prepared to charge a great deal more. Moreover, we can infer from the fact that Flynn accepted the plea deal that he and his counsel were concerned about the degree of jeopardy, both for Flynn and for his son, related to other charges. The deal, in other words, reflects the strength of Mueller’s hand against Flynn.

It reflects something else too: that Flynn is prepared to give Mueller substantial assistance in his investigation and that Mueller wants the assistance Flynn can provide. We are not going to speculate about what that assistance might be. But prosecutors do not give generous deals in major public integrity cases to big-fish defendants without good reason—and in normal cir stances, the national security adviser to the president is a very big fish for a prosecutor. The good reason in this case necessarily involves the testimony Flynn has proffered to the special counsel’s staff. The information in that proffer is not in any of the do ents released Friday, and it may not even be related to the information in those do ents. Prosecutors tend to trade up. That is, for Mueller to give Flynn a deal of this sort, the prosecutor must believe he is building a case against a bigger fish still.

There’s another peculiar nuance: Section 3 of the plea agreement leaves Flynn unprotected against certain future prosecutions. The section is led “Additional Charges” and states in its entirety that “In consideration of your client’s guilty plea to the above offense, your client will not be further prosecuted criminally by this Office for the conduct set forth in the attached Statement of the Offense” (emphasis ours). The office, in other words, seems to be reserving the right to prosecute Flynn for conduct not set forth in that do ent, which is to say all of the other conduct on which he might be vulnerable. It is hard to know what to make of this language. It could mean nothing at all. It could mean that the threat of further prosecution is being held over Flynn’s head if he does not hold up his end of the bargain. It could mean that another plea agreement covering other matters is coming.

........

The most important revelation here is that contrary to Cobb’s statement Friday morning, Flynn is saying clearly that he was not a rogue actor but was operating at the behest of the presidential transition team. He states that a “very senior member of the Presidential Transition Team,” a “senior official of the Presidential Transition Team” and “senior members of the Presidential Transition Team” were involved in directing his actions. The stipulated facts also make clear that Flynn reported back to the transition on his conversations with Kislyak.

Second, take a moment to remember the context in which Flynn’s underlying conduct took place: He and apparently the Trump transition team were working to undermine U.S. foreign policy goals endorsed by both parties. In December 2016, President Obama authorized sanctions against Russia in response to cyber-enabled election interference. He did so with broad bipartisan support to deter such activity in the future against the U.S. and its allies. The shared bipartisan—even nonpartisan—goal was to protect foundational elements of democracy and legitimacy. To the extent that there was mainstream criticism of the action, it was for being too weak, not for being too aggressive with respect to Russia.

https://lawfareblog.com/flynn-plea-q...dirty-analysis

Susan Hennessey is the Executive Editor of Lawfare and General Counsel of the Lawfare Ins ute. She is a Brookings Fellow in National Security Law. Prior to joining Brookings, Ms. Hennessey was an attorney in the Office of General Counsel of the National Security Agency. She is a graduate of Harvard Law School and the University of California, Los Angeles.

[boutons_deux]

James Clapper Destroys Trump’s New Blame Obama Excuse For Mike Flynn’s Russia Crimes

The White House came up with a new blame Obama excuse by telling CNN,

“None of the conversations were improper and were authorized by the Obama administration.”

Clapper said,

“That’s absurd.

That’s absolutely absurd.

There was great concern at the time, not just with this particular contact, but with the violation of the principle that historically been followed of one president,

one administration at a time, and

that gave rise to because of all these contacts that Mike was having and others in the transition with the Russians and other foreign en ies is what is this,

what is this all about?

So to say that we blessed it, or acquiesced it is a stretch.”

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/12/01/james-clapper-destroys-trumps-blame-obama-excuse-mike-flynns-russia-crimes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed& utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29

[Chris]

Oh Danny boy!

[Chris]

>Flynn admits he got confused and inadvertently lied to the FBI
>Trump fires Flynn for lying to the FBI
>Flynn pleads guilty to lying to the FBI
>this is somehow Trump's fault and very bad for him

[Pavlov]

Chris never knows what he's talking about.

[djohn2oo8]

Chris never knows what he's talking about.

[DarrinS]

Kind of an important detail, no?

[boutons_deux]

Kushner, former Trump adviser KT McFarland spoke with Flynn about Russia contacts

President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and former adviser K.T. McFarland were the Trump transition officials who spoke to former U.S. national security adviser Michael Flynn about his contacts with Russian officials, CNN reported Friday.

McFarland went on to serve in the Trump White House and has been nominated to be the U.S. ambassador to Singapore.

CNN also reported she met with investigators for special counsel Robert Mueller

https://www.rawstory.com/2017/12/kus...-contacts-cnn/

[Reck]

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...th-russian?amp

Flynn is going to sink them all. Obama sent him packing and he knows everything. His testimony will be fantastic.

Damn, son. This is a stretch even for you.

We're going beyond calling Flynn an "Obama official" even though he got canned in 2014 and Trump was specifically warned by Obama himself not to hire him.

But go ahead, one more absurd prediction from you is not going to make a bit of difference at this point.

[Reck]

Kind of an important detail, no?

Or you know, the "confidant" freaked after telling the truth and its just now simply backtracking.

But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and go with his new story. Doesn't change the fact Flynn is already on the hook and has already made his deal. He knows who is next in the barrel.

[boutons_deux]

Pence Asks Jesus to Rapture Him Up Before Mueller Can Indict Him




WASHINGTON — Vice-President Mike Pence has requested that Jesus Christ rapture him up before the special counsel Robert Mueller can indict him, a source close to Pence confirmed on Friday.

Shortly after the former national-security adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I.,

Pence contacted Jesus to discuss the early rapture proposal, the source said.

The source characterized

Pence’s request to be raptured up as “urgent”

but did not indicate whether the Vice-President asked Jesus to rapture up any other senior Administration officials.

“Some of these people will have to be left behind, for obvious reasons,” the source said. “Jared, for example.”

After the news of Pence’s conversation with Jesus leaked to the press, the Vice-President released an official statement, intended to tamp down speculation about his rapture request.

“I had a good conversation with Jesus Christ earlier in the day,” the statement read.

“We touched on the timetable of my rapturing-up, along with a broad range of other issues.

That is all I have to say at the present time.”

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/pence-asks-jesus-to-rapture-him-up-before-mueller-can-indict-him

[DarrinS]

Or you know, the "confidant" freaked after telling the truth and its just now simply backtracking.

But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and go with his new story. Doesn't change the fact Flynn is already on the hook and has already made his deal. He knows who is next in the barrel.

It only changes the entire story.

[Reck]

It only changes the entire story.

It does? In what way?

The FBI and Flynn coordinated a public stunt? trumpie logic

[DarrinS]

It does? In what way?

The FBI and Flynn coordinated a public stunt? trumpie logic

https://www.mediaite.com/online/abc-...ng-difference/

[ducks]

http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/01/medi...ion/index.html

Abc correct their mistake that was really not a mistake on their part

[Reck]

https://www.mediaite.com/online/abc-...ng-difference/

I fail to see how this makes any difference in the course of the actual investigation. The story had an effect on the market. But guess what? The market fluctuates up and down.

Flynn still pleaded guilty and has flipped. That's not changing.

[DarrinS]

http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/01/medi...ion/index.html

Abc correct their mistake that was really not a mistake on their part

Lol

“This is not the first high-profile mistake by Ross. In a 2012 piece for which he apologized, he suggested that the Aurora shooter may have had a connection to the Tea Party.”

[DarrinS]

I fail to see how this makes any difference in the course of the actual investigation. The story had an effect on the market. But guess what? The market fluctuates up and down.

Flynn still pleaded guilty and has flipped. That's not changing.

I can see that you don’t understand the significance. That’s ok.

[Reck]

I can see that you don’t understand the significance. That’s ok.

You still haven't said how this changes the investigation in which Flynn is already working for Mueller.

Go ahead. You have an entire day to explain.

[Reck]

But remember dat market tho.