Jack4freedom
Senator
If you had, you would have lost despite your delusional Hannitized “thinking”. Flynn Plead guilty in front of 15-20 people and the court reporter.
Flynn Never Plead Guilty
- Thread starter SoccerMom
- Start date
If you had, you would have lost despite your delusional Hannitized “thinking”. Flynn Plead guilty in front of 15-20 people and the court reporter.
Sickofleft
Mayor
Please see the previous post.
Mick
The Right is always right
Except for the fact that no crime was committed. He wasn't a criminal......competent, incompetent.....or otherwise. You are severely TDS stricken, however, because you still don't understand the requirement for materiality.
Nutty Cortez
Dummy (D) NY
We have explained this clearly- factually - with the legal basis- the legal precident- and last but not least the actual Law
BUT that doesn't matter to @Spamature
Orange man baddddddddd thats all ! Damn the truth !!!!
Spamature
President
If you are saying that lying to the FBI when they know it is a lie is not a crime. Then my post went right over your head.
He took all the actions needed for his actions to be a crime.
Again !
A failed attempt at a crime is still a violation of the law !
Mick
The Right is always right
You are still too dense to figure this out? We are saying.....and the DOJ....and the U.S. attorney for Missouri....and the appeals court.....and anyone with an IQ above 50....that unless the misstatement has material impact on a legitimate criminal investigation then it is not a crime. Period. It doesn't matter what Flynn thought about, didn't think about, was motivated by.....or whether Flynn was simply forgetting details that Strzok admitted he felt was the only reason.
We have a mound of evidence to suggest that Flynn's misstatement was not a lie (Initial 302s written at the time by the agents doing the interview indicated he likely just forgot). We have a mound of evidence that proves the investigation was not legitimate (FBI field office statements recommending closure of investigation, FBI agent comments, the weak logan act nonsense). Even if we throw ALL of that out and take your absurd position that FLynn purposely lied and the investigation was legitimate then that lie is still not a crime unless it materially impacts the investigation. END OF STORY.
It's like dealing with a small, bratty child.
Spamature
President
A conviction on false statements requires materiality, but it’s a very low bar. A lie need only have the potential to influence a government decision.
His lie as you pointed out in your post, that he forgot ,rather than the fact that he lied about the call, had the potential to influence the govt decision . When know he lied precisely to influence the govt's decision on furthering the investigation.
Stop with the dumbassed shite. He lied, he's guilty of lying and he plead guilty to that lying in a sworn statement.
End of story !
Mick
The Right is always right
It couldn't have influenced or impacted their investigation. They had a recording of the call and transcript in hand. This is why everyone with an IQ above 50 realizes this case is a phony and must be thrown out. Think, man. Good God.
The question is why were they asking him questions they had the answers to and had concrete proof of?
Spamature
President
Like you said, they thought maybe he forgot and there was nothing to it ,instead of he's lying and trying to throw off the investigation.
All you need is the "potential" of influence.
You posted that potential to influence the investigation yourself.
Think, man. Good God.
Mick
The Right is always right
It COULD NOT POTENTIALLY throw anything off. They had the transcript and audio in-hand. Flynn's thoughts on the matter are irrevelant.
I'll ask you again since you ignored the previous 100 times. Why were they asking Flynn questions that they already had answers to? Was the effort to "get him to lie so they could prosecute him or get him fired" and they could prove the lie as they readily admitted in their pre-interrogation notes? Seems pretty damn corrupt to target the National Security Advisor of the United States like that, does it not? You know there is no crime so you are going to go in with the express purpose of creating one. Pretty damn bad.
Spamature
President
If it were irrelevant they would have never interviewed him. His trying to deceive them in the interview had the potential to influence the case or else he would have not tried to deceived them in the interview.
No it is not corrupt. What is corrupt is having a national security advisor who could be blackmailed by the Russians for his activities with the Russians and then lying to the FBI about that activity with the Russians making it an even worse the potential for him to be blackmailed by the Russian.
