What a stupid statement. Remind me again of what Capone was charged with and what he was convicted of. Time will tell what he actually did and why. That is going to be what matters.remind me what Flynn was charged with and what he plead guilty to.
Flynn going down is a big big deal. The wagons are circling around DJT
You realize with a deal often the person pleads guilty to the lower charge to avoid the more severe charge. Most likely they had him on TREASON. People have suspected this for like ever and Flynn would definitely plea to lying to the FBI to avoid a definite treason conviction.remind me what Flynn was charged with and what he plead guilty to.
it seems to me that the spirit of the Logan Act would not extend to preventing the President-Elect (and his subordinates) from taking steps to enable the exercise of the authority to conduct foreign affairs that they will soon formally possess.
I wondered if they had a lot more damaging info on Flynn otherwise, and there was an idle threat reject a pardon and help, or it all comes out. If that didn't happen, I to an surprised there was no pardon or that he didn't fight the charge.I am surprised Trump didn't offer him a pardon for keeping his mouth shut.
You don't have a clue what a plea deal is do you. Or are you being purposely obtuse. The point is, if you looked at all the other charges he could have been charged with i.e. acting as a foreign agent, violation of the Logan act, you know that he proffered a deal. That means that he has agreed to testify about things he knows that Mueller feels is valuable to his case against higher ups. But, continue on in your talking point that they barely knew Flynn and he was just passing through but they caught him in a lie and got rid of him without any public pressure involved.remind me what Flynn was charged with and what he plead guilty to.
You realize with a deal often the person pleads guilty to the lower charge to avoid the more severe charge. Most likely they had him on TREASON. People have suspected this for like ever and Flynn would definitely plea to lying to the FBI to avoid a definite treason conviction.
This is dumb. Treason has a specific meaning and Trump did not commit Treason. He seems to have done something that would qualify for impeachment, but not Treason.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
Don't blow this by making things seem bigger than they are. This is already big enough.
This is dumb. Treason has a specific meaning and Trump did not commit Treason. He seems to have done something that would qualify for impeachment, but not Treason.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
Don't blow this by making things seem bigger than they are. This is already big enough.
Up the Adderall and re-read that post again.
Uh, depending on your definition of 'enemy' and 'aid', yes, you most certainly can work out that treason is exactly what Trump has been involved in. If he promised aid to Russia in the form of .. well, anything the position of Presidency might permit him, and if you consider Russia an enemy of the US (I'd say meddling in an election would classify them as such), that's pretty much verbatim Treason..This is dumb. Treason has a specific meaning and Trump did not commit Treason. He seems to have done something that would qualify for impeachment, but not Treason.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
Don't blow this by making things seem bigger than they are. This is already big enough.
The actions of Flynn are potentially treasonous. There really isn't much of a debate. And again plea deals mean they had something more serious on Flynn. Treason comes to mind based on the rumors of his actions. But it could be anything. All we can say for sure is whatever he was trying to avoid was way way more serious particularly if he is willing to flip on the President of the United States to save his own bacon.This is dumb. Treason has a specific meaning and Trump did not commit Treason. He seems to have done something that would qualify for impeachment, but not Treason.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
Don't blow this by making things seem bigger than they are. This is already big enough.
Uh, depending on your definition of 'enemy' and 'aid', yes, you most certainly can work out that treason is exactly what Trump has been involved in. If he promised aid to Russia in the form of .. well, anything the position of Presidency might permit him, and if you consider Russia an enemy of the US (I'd say meddling in an election would classify them as such), that's pretty much verbatim Treason..
What is it that Trump did?
The actions of Flynn are potentially treasonous. There really isn't much of a debate. And again plea deals mean they had something more serious on Flynn. Treason comes to mind based on the rumors of his actions.
They did not have Flynn on Treason either. Nobody is saying Treason because Treason was not even close.
Yeah, fair enough. Legalese has never been my personal strong point. I'd say colloquially most would agree with this sentiment if/when relevant facts come out regarding the situation.Treason is generally understood by the courts only to apply to people we are at war with, not people who are simply opposed to the US.
In a legal sense I'm pretty sure neither committed treason. In a colloquial sense it seems possible both did.
Treason is generally understood by the courts only to apply to people we are at war with, not people who are simply opposed to the US.
In a legal sense I'm pretty sure neither committed treason. In a colloquial sense it seems possible both did.
I really don't see how you can look at it in any other way. He was a f'n general for f's sake and about to land one of the most sensitive intelligence jobs in the country. What the f is he doing talking to the Russians. Basically, telling them, hey will work this sanctions shit out, no worries.And you don't know this. It is highly likely that they did given who he met with.
It's quite likely that there are treasonous acts involved in the various contacts, it's kinda unavoidable dealing with a spy for a foreign nation when you are a higher ranking officer since the contact IN AND OF ITSELF is an act of treason.
I really don't see how you can look at it in any other way. He was a f'n general for f's sake and about to land one of the most sensitive intelligence jobs in the country. What the f is he doing talking to the Russians. Basically, telling them, hey will work this sanctions shit out, no worries.
Well, at least according to Trump dick lickers.Apparently the US laws concerning these matters are different from ours.
According to your laws having Generals with inside knowledge about everything meeting with known spies for foreign hostile nations unofficially is just fine.
Heh, it's funny how US law works, generally in favor of 'high crimes' getting a pass, but 'low crimes' having truly legendary conviction rates. The War on Drugs would make 1470's Spain blush, but just try convicting someone of destroying the economy, betraying the country (unless you're an E-5 or below of course), or stealing billions.. you'll be laughed out of the courthouse.Apparently the US laws concerning these matters are different from ours.
According to your laws having Generals with inside knowledge about everything meeting with known spies for foreign hostile nations unofficially is just fine.
He who doubts from what he sees will n'ere believe, do what you please. -- Wm BlakeThere is none so blind, who will not see.