Pelosi demands Democratic oversight of CV19 Relief Funds . . Nancy please convene a Congressional Investigation as to how VP Biden's Son Hunter was awarded $130 Million Federal bailout loan for 2009 TALF Program.

[BradleyPNW + 282]

11 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Gotta say, I love your descriptives.

Myth vs Reality. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

52 minutes ago, BradleyPNW said:

Let's take a look at what that means. 

quote source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News

And, since People Using Television (see TV viewing age graph) is in a pretty sharp free-fall, Fox News is grabbing a larger audience of olds from a shrinking pool of viewers. 

After red hat America occupies US coastal cities and the compression sock wearing mobility scooter riding block captain starts ordering me to salute when I pass the Donald Trump propaganda poster I'll sneak by when he's in the middle of his nap to detach his battery cables from his drive motor and that will be the end of that. 

Look, a civil uprising ain't happening. Sit down and try to draw out a logistical plan. You'll see what I mean. 

Interesting...Sweden's data. 

https://www.ubs.com/global/en/investor-relations/investors/shareholder-information/significant-shareholder.html

Meanwhile back in the US we have this taking place...the Unmasking of the message and messengers...Its only just begun.

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by Eyes Wide Open

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

43 minutes ago, BradleyPNW said:

Myth vs Reality. 

All i can say we never should have let the teeny boppers vote.....

 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by Eyes Wide Open

[BradleyPNW + 282]

6 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Meanwhile back in the US we have this taking place...the Unmasking of the message and messengers...Its only just begun.

Patriot: "Who is the traitor chatting with the Russians?"

Traitor: "That's not fair!" 

Law: "Yes, yes it is. We got procedures for it and everything because intelligence officials need to know who the traitors are. By the way, you lied to the FBI about talking to the Russians. They caught you and then you pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. You pleaded guilty twice, in fact. Your traitor co-conspirators are humping this like the really good looking really cool Canadian girlfriend they met at Niagara Falls. But we all know there ain't not girlfriend, friend." 

https://www.startribune.com/q-a-what-does-unmasking-someone-in-an-intel-report-mean/570451592/

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

14 minutes ago, BradleyPNW said:

Patriot: "Who is the traitor chatting with the Russians?"

Traitor: "That's not fair!" 

Law: "Yes, yes it is. We got procedures for it and everything because intelligence officials need to know who the traitors are. By the way, you lied to the FBI about talking to the Russians. They caught you and then you pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. You pleaded guilty twice, in fact. Your traitor co-conspirators are humping this like the really good looking really cool Canadian girlfriend they met at Niagara Falls. But we all know there ain't not girlfriend, friend." 

https://www.startribune.com/q-a-what-does-unmasking-someone-in-an-intel-report-mean/570451592/

Perfectly legal, for a member of the incoming administration to talk to the Russian Ambassador.  This from The Heritage Foundation:

Michael Flynn Finally Seems to Be Getting the Justice He Deserves

By now, the backstory may be familiar. 

A three-star general who clashed with the Obama administration as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Flynn retired from the military. He then started his own consulting firm and began advising then-candidate Donald Trump. 

After the election, Flynn helped with the Trump transition team and, ultimately, was appointed as national security adviser to the new president.

He lasted only 24 days in that post. But it was during those 24 days that he allegedly lied to two FBI agents in what can only be described as an ambush interview.

What did the FBI question him about? A December 2016 conversation Flynn had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The conversation was perfectly legitimate, as Flynn was the incoming national security adviser for the president-elect.

The exact legal basis for why the FBI wanted to talk to Flynn has always been murky and the grounds look more dubious now than ever.

Sally Yates, the former deputy attorney general in the Obama administration, told Congress it was because Flynn had supposedly violated the Logan Act by holding that conversation. 

The Logan Act (18 U.S.C. §953) is a more than 200-year-old criminal statute that purports to ban Americans from engaging in unauthorized negotiations with officials from a foreign government that is having a dispute with the United States. 

There have been only two attempts to prosecute anyone under the law, the last coming in 1852. Neither attempt was successful. 

Why had there been no prosecutions after that? Because virtually all legal scholars on both sides of the political aisle agree that it is “flagrantly unconstitutional.”

In modern times, many prominent individuals—like Jesse Jackson, Danny Glover, Sean Penn, Dennis Rodman, Ted Kennedy, and John Kerry—have violated the act, some repeatedly. 

Even if the act could be applied to many private individuals, it makes no sense to apply it to an appointee of an incoming administration whose duties include speaking with representatives of foreign governments. In fact, the motion to dismiss admits that “the Logan Act would be difficult to prosecute.” 

This is an important consideration because it means that, contrary to Yates’ testimony, the FBI had no valid legal basis for interviewing Flynn. 

[BradleyPNW + 282]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

Perfectly legal, for a member of the incoming administration to talk to the Russian Ambassador.  This from The Heritage Foundation:

Therefore, no reason to lie about it, right? Except he did lie about it. In front of the FBI. With his attorneys present. After he lied about it he got caught then had to plead guilty to lying about it. 

Flynn could have just refused to answer those questions. Instead, he chose to lie. Even when he didn't have to lie. I'm thinking the content of those phone calls with the Russians was shady. As in, not in America's best interests. Because if Flynn was acting in America's best interests he would have told the FBI the truth. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

3 minutes ago, BradleyPNW said:

Therefore, no reason to lie about it, right? Except he did lie about it. In front of the FBI. With his attorneys present. After he lied about it he got caught then had to plead guilty to lying about it. 

Flynn could have just refused to answer those questions. Instead, he chose to lie. Even when he didn't have to lie. I'm thinking the content of those phone calls with the Russians was shady. As in, not in America's best interests. Because if Flynn was acting in America's best interests he would have told the FBI the truth. 

What you or I "think" or "assume" does not matter much, does it?  In our legal system, since the FBI had no valid legal basis for interviewing Flynn, and then they did anyway, and then they advised him that he did not need legal representation, and in fact said that "we just want to have a conversation with you", that is considered entrapment under our legal system.  Entrapment is not legal in our legal system.  The only decision possible, in my humble opinion, is to drop all charges. 

Even if the act could be applied to many private individuals, it makes no sense to apply it to an appointee of an incoming administration whose duties include speaking with representatives of foreign governments. In fact, the motion to dismiss admits that “the Logan Act would be difficult to prosecute.” 

This is an important consideration because it means that, contrary to Yates’ testimony, the FBI had no valid legal basis for interviewing Flynn. 

[frankfurter + 562]

On 5/12/2020 at 5:03 AM, BLA said:

Hunter Biden (VP Joe Biden's son) and Chris Heinz (Sec of State John Kerry's stepson) were somehow approved and received $130 Million in TALF bailout funds, a real insider sweetheart deal.  The two established an offshore shell company in the Cayman Islands to funnel the millions in profits thru to avoid paying U.S. taxes and stay out of sight of the IRS. 

These loans were Federally guaranteed. Biden and Heinz couldn't lose money. In fact they made a boat load of money  .  .  .  $ Millions. 

The Democrats also gave the wife (with no Finance Background)  of Morgan Stanley Executive (who is a major DNC Contributor),  $280 million in TALF Loan Funds. 

All this and nobody cares ? 

NONE OF THE THREE HAD ANY EXPERIENCE IN FINANCE.  

Just prior to these 2009 sweetheart deals Hunter was working for a D.C. lobbying firm.  He was not very good at it.  

The U.S. needs to audit the businesses of the Biden family that received huge lucrative government contracts  from the Federal government during Joe's terms of public service. That includes Hunter, daughter/son-in-law, brother etc.  

Nancy let us know if Hunter will be making free millions this time around ?

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/22/report-hunter-biden-linked-firm-received-130-million-in-federal-bailout-loans/

Is anything more needed to prove the USA is a fascist state?  To paraphrase 0R0, you should round up the entire cabal and drop them out of a 15-story window. You will do yourselves and the rest of the world a favour. 

 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

30 minutes ago, BradleyPNW said:

Therefore, no reason to lie about it, right? Except he did lie about it. In front of the FBI. With his attorneys present. After he lied about it he got caught then had to plead guilty to lying about it. 

Flynn could have just refused to answer those questions. Instead, he chose to lie. Even when he didn't have to lie. I'm thinking the content of those phone calls with the Russians was shady. As in, not in America's best interests. Because if Flynn was acting in America's best interests he would have told the FBI the truth. 

Ok back to Antifa for you...perhaps a link to this lie...It should be quite interesting, you are aware the FBI upon the initial investigation determined Flynn was not spying and he did disclose his russian contacts. It was only after the investigation began they went back and began a new series of questioning.

I would stay away from the RawStory site..it is a bit lacking in complete disclosure.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

25 minutes ago, frankfurter said:

Is anything more needed to prove the USA is a fascist state?  To paraphrase 0R0, you should round up the entire cabal and drop them out of a 15-story window. You will do yourselves and the rest of the world a favour. 

 

So in a non fascist state being drilled out of the Armed forces for drug abuse is a acceptable part of ones resume along with the depth it takes to sit on a energy board? I get your rage but dont you think you should check it at the door before opening it?

Edited May 14, 2020 by Eyes Wide Open

[BradleyPNW + 282]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

What you or I "think" or "assume" does not matter much, does it?  In our legal system, since the FBI had no valid legal basis for interviewing Flynn, and then they did anyway, and then they advised him that he did not need legal representation, and in fact said that "we just want to have a conversation with you", that is considered entrapment under our legal system.  Entrapment is not legal in our legal system.  The only decision possible, in my humble opinion, is to drop all charges. 

Doesn't matter why FBI interviewed Flynn. You can't lie to the FBI. As I said, Flynn could have just refused to answer the question. The only reason you think the charges should be dropped is because Trump Cult Media told you they should be dropped. 

Do you know who doesn't think the charges should be dropped? The DOJ prosecutor and the judge. Two people very familiar with our legal system. 

Edited May 14, 2020 by BradleyPNW

[BradleyPNW + 282]

1 hour ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Ok back to Antifa for you...perhaps a link to this lie...It should be quite interesting, you are aware the FBI upon the initial investigation determined Flynn was not spying and he did disclose his russian contacts. It was only after the investigation began they went back and began a new series of questioning.

I would stay away from the RawStory site..it is a bit lacking in complete disclosure.

Are you aware Flynn pleaded guilty to the crime of lying to the FBI, twice. Like, do you think Flynn's defense attorney was in on the conspiracy, too? 

[BradleyPNW + 282]

This pretty much stabs a stake through the heart of Trumpland conspiracy theories that poor Michael Flynn was hoodwinked by the FBI. 

https://www.lawfareblog.com/former-national-security-advisers-sentencing-hearing-flynncompetent-judging

Quote

So Judge Sullivan made Flynn do just that. Under oath, he effectively redid Flynn’s plea colloquy, making the defendant address on the record each of the following questions:

“Do you wish to challenge the circumstances on which you were interviewed by the FBI?”
“Do you understand that by maintaining your guilty plea and continuing with sentencing, you will give up your right forever to challenge the circumstances under which you were interviewed?”
“Do you have any concerns that you entered your guilty plea before you or your attorneys were able to review information that could have been helpful to your defense?”
“At the time of your Jan. 24, 2017 interview with the FBI, were you not aware that lying to FBI investigators was a federal crime?”
“Do you seek an opportunity to withdraw your plea in light of [new] revelations” referred to in your brief?
“Are you satisfied with the services provided by your attorneys?”
“Do you want the court to consider appointing an independent attorney for you in this case to give you a second opinion?”
“Do you feel that you were competent and capable of entering into a guilty plea when you [pleaded] guilty on Dec. 1, 2017?”
“Do you understand the nature of the charges against you[,] the consequences of pleading guilty?”
“Are you continuing to accept responsibility for your false statements?”
“Do you still want to plead guilty, or do you want me to postpone this matter, give you a chance to speak with your attorneys further, either in the courtroom or privately at their office or elsewhere, and pick another day for a status conference?”

Flynn answered all of these questions in a fashion consistent with his plea, pulling the rug out from under the conspiracy theorists. Judge Sullivan then went on to question his lawyers:

“Do you have any concerns that potential Brady material”—that is, exculpatory evidence material to the defendant’s guilt or innocence under Brady v. Maryland—"or other relevant material was not provided to you?”
“Do you contend that Mr. Flynn is entitled to any additional information that has not been provided to you?”
“Do you wish to seek any additional information before moving forward to sentencing?”
“Do you believe the FBI had a legal obligation to warn Mr. Flynn that lying to the FBI was a federal crime?”
“Is it your contention that Mr. Flynn was entrapped by the FBI?”
“Do you believe Mr. Flynn’s rights were violated by the fact that he did not have a lawyer present for the interview?”
“Do you believe his rights were violated by the fact that he may have been dissuaded from having a lawyer present for the interview?”
“Is it your contention that any misconduct by a member of the FBI raises any degree of doubt that Mr. Flynn intentionally lied to the FBI?”

Kelner answered all of these questions in the negative. “And you’re not asking for a postponement to give more time to whether you wish to file a motion to attempt to withdraw Mr. Flynn’s plea of guilty?” asked the judge.

Responded Kelner: “We have no intention and the defendant has no intention to withdraw the guilty plea, and we’re certainly not asking Your Honor to consider that. We’re ready to proceed to sentencing.”

On this basis, Judge Sullivan declared, “I conclude that there was and remains to be a factual basis for Mr. Flynn’s plea of guilty. As such, there’s no reason to reject his guilty plea and I’ll, therefore, move on to the sentencing phase.”

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, BradleyPNW said:

Doesn't matter why FBI interviewed Flynn. You can't lie to the FBI. As I said, Flynn could have just refused to answer the question. The only reason you think the charges should be dropped is because Trump Cult Media told you they should be dropped. 

Do you know who doesn't think the charges should be dropped? The DOJ prosecutor and the judge. Two people very familiar with our legal system. 

First and foremost, the FBI cannot lie to a citizen.  The government's powers are limited, and limited for good reason.  It is called rule of law.  The FBI is duty bound to hold themselves to a higher standard.  In this case, they have been found to have lowered their standards to an unacceptable level.  Do not accuse me of being some sort of lapdog; I stand on my own feet just fine.  The ONLY reason the charges will be dropped is because the FBI abused their power, and that is unacceptable.  I am disappointed that your blind hatred does not allow you to see that and agree, or even shout from the rooftops that it must be.  The United States have cleared out the management of the FBI, the CIA, in fact every department of the federal government with regularity: each time we elect a new president.  This is not some new thing.

If you want to play semantics, play with yourself.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, BradleyPNW said:

This pretty much stabs a stake through the heart of Trumpland conspiracy theories that poor Michael Flynn was hoodwinked by the FBI. 

https://www.lawfareblog.com/former-national-security-advisers-sentencing-hearing-flynncompetent-judging

 

The article has no citations or references to any record of any kind.  It is co-written by Quinta Jurecic, who is also a writer for the Washington Post and the Atlantic, both anti-trump left wing organizations that have made it their purpose in life to bring down the Trump presidency.  Their word is not gospel.  They defend career bureaucracies and bureaucrats over the elected President of the United States.  If Hoover still ran the FBI he would be proud of you for supporting them.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, BradleyPNW said:

Doesn't matter why FBI interviewed Flynn. You can't lie to the FBI. As I said, Flynn could have just refused to answer the question. The only reason you think the charges should be dropped is because Trump Cult Media told you they should be dropped. 

Do you know who doesn't think the charges should be dropped? The DOJ prosecutor and the judge. Two people very familiar with our legal system. 

The DOJ prosecutor recused himself.  You and I can speculate all day as to why.  As far as i know he has not said.

The judge has not said in any way that he does not think the charges should not be dropped.  According to the latest article I could find, this one from CBSNews, he is allowing written statements from more parties to be submitted for review due to the rash of media coverage.  That is not a quote, it is my summary; here is the article:

Federal judge not rubber-stamping Justice Department's dropping of Flynn charges

I like the headline.  It reflects a respect for rule of law.  We shall see if the charges are dropped or not, but that is up to the Justice Department.

(Excerpts)

The judge said he expects to set a scheduling order governing the submission of such briefs, known as amicus curiae — or friend-of-the-court — briefs.

In a court filing Tuesday night, lawyers for Flynn objected to an amicus brief that a group identifying itself as "Watergate Prosecutors" had said it intended to submit, saying the brief and others like it have "no place in this Court."

"A criminal case is a dispute between the United States and a criminal defendant. There is no place for third parties to meddle in the dispute, and certainly not to usurp the role of the government's counsel," Flynn's attorneys wrote.

It is also possible that Sullivan could ask for additional information from the department about its decision, including more details about why it was abruptly abandoning a case it had pursued in court since 2017, when Flynn pleaded guilty.

In an interview Tuesday evening with Fox News, Justice Department spokesperson Kerri Kupec said the department's position was clear in the motion to dismiss the case.

"We do not believe this case should have been brought, we are correcting that and we certainly hope that in the interest of true justice, that the judge ultimately agrees and drops the case against General Flynn," she said. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

59 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

First and foremost, the FBI cannot lie to a citizen.  The government's powers are limited, and limited for good reason.  It is called rule of law.  The FBI is duty bound to hold themselves to a higher standard.  In this case, they have been found to have lowered their standards to an unacceptable level.  Do not accuse me of being some sort of lapdog; I stand on my own feet just fine.  The ONLY reason the charges will be dropped is because the FBI abused their power, and that is unacceptable.  I am disappointed that your blind hatred does not allow you to see that and agree, or even shout from the rooftops that it must be.  The United States have cleared out the management of the FBI, the CIA, in fact every department of the federal government with regularity: each time we elect a new president.  This is not some new thing.

If you want to play semantics, play with yourself.

You are wasting your time with this one Dan, he’s a ‘true believer’. Best just drop it and grab another coffee...

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Why is Obama or even Clinton(s) mentioned anymore?

Obama would be the POTUS if he was allowed to run again. Trump beat a woman - wow that's amazing - not.

Good luck running against any Joe Blow white man with your list of failures, impeachment, etc. 

Record levels of death,unemployment, and economic collapse generally doesn't win re-election. But you do you America.

 

 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Make America dead, broke, or both!

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Nearly 4 years, how much more awesome is life?

Shit it sucks - better blame Obama somehow.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

16 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Why is Obama or even Clinton(s) mentioned anymore?

Obama would be the POTUS if he was allowed to run again. Trump beat a woman - wow that's amazing - not.

Good luck running against any Joe Blow white man with your list of failures, impeachment, etc. 

Record levels of death,unemployment, and economic collapse generally doesn't win re-election. But you do you America.

 

 

Let’s revisit this after November...

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

3 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Let’s revisit this after November...

Who is trump going to blame during his campaign? Himself? China? 

You can't run a successful campaign of hate against yourself. Trump has zero idea how to run as the incumbent. A legacy of success would help, but that is clearly NOT the case.

[BradleyPNW + 282]

9 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

The DOJ prosecutor recused himself.  You and I can speculate all day as to why.  As far as i know he has not said.

Withdrew, not recused. There was never an ethical concern or conflict of interest that demanded a recusal. The new prosecutor had to file the motion to dismiss under an original prosecutor's bar number because the new prosecutor had no standing in court.

We know why Van Grack withdrew. He refused to  file the motion to dismiss charges. 

The judge appointed a retired judge to examine whether or not the charges should be dropped. 

Here's what we know from reconciling the various facts: Donald Trump abused his office and corrupted the DOJ with Barr's cooperation to interfere in a criminal court case. Trump Cult Media plays along because that's how they make their money. Trump toadies play along because...I have no idea. I can't believe Americans cuck themselves for the sake of criminal incompetents who don't care a whit about them. Donald spits in their faces every single day and they beg for more. 

[BradleyPNW + 282]

9 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

You are wasting your time with this one Dan, he’s a ‘true believer’. Best just drop it and grab another coffee...

Little self-awareness with this one: 'true believer' professes the Trump cultist. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

On 5/13/2020 at 9:20 PM, BradleyPNW said:

Are you aware Flynn pleaded guilty to the crime of lying to the FBI, twice. Like, do you think Flynn's defense attorney was in on the conspiracy, too? 

They well could be, what took place is being disclosed. Now i ask you what did Flynn plead guilty to and why did he enter his this guilty plea? 

I highly suspect the answer will be crickets...in the night.