That makes zero sense. Unless they were trumps bodies and he doesnt have any am I right? If they were Obama’s bodies wouldnt trump or Barr be happy to dig em up
Is this what you believe?
interesting… that’s the same thing Mcabe did.
I am referring to Flynn wanting to withdraw his guilty plea.
It means that he was lied about lying.
Which honestly opens up the legal question that if he knowingly lied to obtain his plea deal then what does that entail?
There’s no conspiracy here, there’s no “deep state” plot. There’s not even a two tiered justice system involved in this decision. There are only two relevant facts that control it.
-
A DC grand jury will never indict anyone for anything if they are perceived to be anti-GOP. Scooter
Libby was indicted for saying “I don’t recall”. More importantly he was indicted for being tied to Bush/Cheney. McCabe did worse, but he’s anti Trump, so… no indictment. -
There’s a bit of circling the wagons involved here. What McCabe did is nothing new for the FBI or DoJ. An indictment against him is an indictment against some of the more questionable practices employed there. Like secretly approving “leaks” denying it and then claiming to investigate where the leak came from while they decry the “leak”. McCabe is one of there own. A bit of “we take care of our own” enters into this.
3 Likes
Victimization is strong.
2 Likes
The same thing it would entail in any “coerced confession”… nothing. It will be interesting to see if any of the evidence against him, and subsequent confessions are admitted. Fruit of the poisonous tree and all.
no victimization involved. just political realities.
So going with the coerced confession thing.
Okay.
Knowing what we know about Flynn and all of the shady stuff he was involved in, that seems quite silly.
1 Like
What do you mean? This is central to the entire “Deep State” conspiracy that the President is deeply invested in. When McCabe lies about leaking info that was damaging to Hillary Clinton and wasn’t charged all of that silly gibberish is out of the window, but there’s always a ready supply of hand wavers and alternative explanations to keep the conspiracy alive.
Lol. The prosecutors resigned in protest of the AGs meddling at the Presidents direction. Is he trying to sell that they resigned because of Stone’s treatment?
so they couldn’t get an indictment because deep state.
1 Like
They just feel compelled to defend anyone who can be defined as a conservative in any way. They even make all those threads like “look at this terrible thing that this random liberal did” and when the liberals here are like “so what, ■■■■ that guy” they spend the thread explaining how the liberals really are defending him.
1 Like
not me, him. question is, will it fly? quite possibly won’t need to. if much of the evidence gets thrown out as “fruit of the poisonous tree”, the confessions go with it.
Um I think you’re confused about how this works.
nope. they couldn’t get an indictment because of the biases you run into with a DC grand jury. thats not deep state, its just political reality. Same thing might happen in AL or MS only the other way. Though I doubt that because even they have more political diversity than DC.
not at all confused. I know there is evidence that is not originated from the now admitted illegal surveillance, and the prosecution can argue inevitable discovery, but anything that doesn’t fall there goes out, including any confessions derived from it.
That’s not how voluntarily elocuting in open court works bro.
They need to get GJ out of DC to have any effect.
We have always had a 2 tiered system, people with money and power have a better chance of getting away with crimes.
Change the system, not the people.
