Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Flynn Case Still has Interesting Things Going on [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, I have that feeling like when I was passing notes in school and have been called up to the front of the classroom.

I won't defend Taibbi -- he is just a journalist, but Turley is a law professor and lawyer who I've followed for years. (I don't get request for email on my browser for any links I posted -- sorry for providing such a link.) Of course, everyone offering an opinion has an agenda.

I've heard allegations of other illegal acts by Flynn. I haven't studied the matter at all. I guess I discounted those allegations as he was only charged with lying to FBI in one interview. Recent reports of internal FBI communications showing recommendation to drop investigation against Flynn -- prior to that one interview -- also cause me to discount the allegations.

But I've violated my personal rule about spending too much time on stuff that really doesn't matter in my life. I've spent an hour on ST already instead of running on a beautiful morning. Gotta run.

Peace.

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev
Quote Reply
Re: Flynn Case Still has Interesting Things Going on [chaparral] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chaparral wrote:
H- wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
H- wrote:
Russiagate was a scam.


If you agree with this, can you be more specific, because the Mueller report was quite long and detailed?


Read the Taibbi piece. Here it is again. Here's the pertinent part with regard to Russiagate:

Quote:
The WMD fiasco happened because journalists listened to people with military ranks and titles instead of demanding evidence and listening to their own instincts. The same thing happened with Russiagate, a story fueled by intelligence “experts” with grand titles who are now proven to have been wrong to a spectacular degree, if not actually criminally liable in pushing a fraud.


Imbedded in the word "wrong" is Taibbi's Rolling Stone piece on the Horowitz report. See also the other links.

Taibbi is a huge Trump critic, for example writing, in a Rolling Stone piece entitled The Madness of Donald Trump:

Quote:
Evening, August 22nd, 2017, a convention center in Phoenix. It’s Donald Trump’s true coming-out party as an insane person.


Taibbi addresses Russiagate further in comments accompanying the substack article (actually, pretty cool he will tangle with commentors).

For more on Russiagate, read the Turley article that I linked above.

Did Mueller in his report note that Flynn had been cleared by the FBI of anything improper in connection with Russia but then the 7th Floor decided he be interviewed to try to catch him in a lie (rhetorical question, Mueller had no clue about anything)?

You can say he's wrong, but I'm just saying when a Rolling Stone writer says there may be criminal liability for FBI having pushed a fraud against Donald Trump, we should perhaps at least agree it ain't coming from a partisan hack (at least a Republican one--and my opinion is that Taibbi is a real free thinker).



Lets break down the facts:

1: Russia hacked the DNC
2: Russia interfered specifically to help trump
3: The trump campaigned made multiple attempts to get assistance from Russia, who is an active advisory of the United States
4: The trump campaign actively assisted Russia with their misinformation
5: The trump campaign subsequently lied and hid their actions with regards to Russia
6: Due to the lies and the destruction of evidence, we still do not know the extent of the cooperation. Still no good reason they were sharing polling data.

That is not a scam. That is one of the greatest political scandals of all time. Furthermore, trump to this day is trying to protect Russia. He actively tried to push their propaganda that Russia did not hack the DNC. Calling it a scam is just wrong. It is not a fraud.

Taibbi uses a specific technique to conflate multiple issues. He tries to conflate the Carter Page FISA as some central thing.

And what is wrong with Taibbi thinking journalists could be held criminally liable?

Wait, are you actually saying that since Flynn did nothing wrong with regards to Russia, he could not commit any other crime? He was a unregistered foreign agent getting classified briefings. That is such an blatant national security issue. Not to mention they wanted to kidnap a US resident! Is the FBI just supposed to ignore that? Shouldn't trump be happy the FBI got such a liability out of the administration?

And yet, knowing all this, people are still willing to say things like “Russiagate was a scam.”
Quote Reply
Re: Flynn Case Still has Interesting Things Going on [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dave_w wrote:
Slowman wrote:
remind me why you're defending this shitbird? i forgot.


-

entrapment, selective enforcement, coercion, these are things that I hope you don't want from your govt enforcement agencies. Gotta go ride.

plus 1
Quote Reply
Re: Flynn Case Still has Interesting Things Going on [H-] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
H- wrote:
Well, I have that feeling like when I was passing notes in school and have been called up to the front of the classroom. ...

I was on an IPA-fueled soapbox. We hold our star pupils to a higher standard. Not fair, is it? :)

Off for a hike, myself. Cheers!
Quote Reply
Re: Flynn Case Still has Interesting Things Going on [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb wrote:
I'm disappointed that you are citing Turley and Taibbi. I think of you as an LR poster who has the capability for cold, sober, rational thought. These authors are not people I had heard of before you mentioned them.
-
Turley just featured prominently in the Trump impeachment (Trump side, critical of the strength of the articles of impeachment). Here's just a bit from his wiki:

Prior to joining the George Washington University, he was on the faculty of Tulane University Law School.[8]
His articles on legal and policy issues appear regularly in national publications; as of 2012, Turley has had articles published in newspapers such as The New York Times,[9] The Washington Post,[10] USA Today,[11] the Los Angeles Times,[6] and the Wall Street Journal.[12] He frequently appears in the national media as a commentator on a multitude of subjects[13][14] ranging from the 2000 U.S. presidential election controversy to the Terri Schiavo case in 2005.[15] He often is a guest on Sunday talk shows,[13] with more than two-dozen appearances on Meet the Press, ABC This Week, Face the Nation, and Fox News Sunday. He served as a contributor on Countdown with Keith Olbermann from 2003 until 2011, and later on Current TV[16] in 2011 and early 2012; Turley also appears occasionally on Pacifica Radio's Democracy Now!.[17]
Since the 1990s, he has been the legal analyst for NBC News and CBS News covering stories that ranged from the Clinton impeachment to the presidential elections.[8] He is on the board of contributors of USA Today.[18] and writes regularly for the Washington Post. He has written hundreds of columns in those papers and other national publications including the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and other publications.[19] He is also a columnist with the Hill newspaper [20] He currently is legal analyst for CBS News and the BBC.[21]
Quote Reply
Re: Flynn Case Still has Interesting Things Going on [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here's a sharp conservative (Andrew McCarthy) that takes a look at what it seems Flynn's lawyer is going for:

https://thehill.com/...and-maybe-others-too

ps. For the record, I'm not sure whether Flynn is a good or bad guy, or just a guy, in all this. I do however think the FBI messed, and that's the part that should matter to everyone. Comey admitted ignoring process already, and we've been told many times here in the LR that process is paramount:

"NICOLE WALLACE: You look at this White House now and it's hard to imagine two FBI agents hanging out in the [Situation] room. How does that happen?

JAMES COMEY: I sent them.

[crowd laughs]

Something we, I probably wouldn't have done or gotten away with in a more organized investigation -- a more organized administration... The Bush administration, the Obama administration... The FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official. You would work through the White House counsel and there were discussions and approvals and it would be there and I thought, it's early enough. Let's just send a couple of guys over."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/...n_investigation.html
Last edited by: dave_w: May 2, 20 13:41
Quote Reply
Re: Flynn Case Still has Interesting Things Going on [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well your list establishes Turley as someone who likes to talk on media and so maybe eb should have run across him. But I'd say that list is the least flattering way to present his resume.

I've kinda followed Turley since I met him when he arrived at Tulane in the summer of 1988. He went to Chicago and Northwestern. But besides having an ego (every pundit, especially the TV pundits, does), he's also been very active as a real lawyer, and not just appellate stuff.

I listen to Turley because he tends to speak up often when it is not popular to do so. Sort of like the ACLU representing the Klan. (Not sure that reference is very relevant today.) He takes tough positions in the name of protecting important processes. He was the sole Republican expert against impeachment earlier this year (wow, remember that?).

Counterpoint: Turley catches some heat and is not immune from arguments that all he seeks is self-aggrandizement. Here's an article entitled "I had a crush on Prof. Jonathan in law school but hate him now." (I have a bad, evil sense of humor to go along with other problems. Sorry. By the way, I can't believe GW law didn't have anonymous exams in the mid-90s)

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev
Quote Reply

Prev Next