Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, May 16, 2019

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn told investigators that people linked to the Trump administration and Congress reached out to him in an effort to interfere in the Russia probe, according to newly-unredacted court papers filed Thursday. Flynn even provided a voicemail recording of one such communication, the court papers say. "In some instances, the SCO was unaware of the outreach until being alerted to it by the defendant," Mueller wrote.

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

There are myriad reasons that Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker and everyone else isn't. There's still much coming that will more than likely cook Trump's goose along with those in the GOP congressional delegation caught up in criminal obstruction of the Mueller investigation and prosecutions.

People are going to jail and it's going to be glorious watching the GOP having to deal with all the criminals within its ranks. But I guess there's always the Barr Variant, but he may have shot his puny wad already. Remember the adage, he/she who laughs last....

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-16 06:41 PM | Reply

- People are going to jail

That's right, Tony the Tiger.

And your stripes are going to turn white when it all goes down.

I don't know if they make shackles in 'cankle' sizes. They might need to use two.

#2 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-05-16 07:05 PM | Reply

A couple of things we know about this:
It wasn't Trump or it would have been included in the evidence to substantiate Obstruction of Justice in Mueller's report.

Either Mueller felt that it did not rise to the level of obstruction of justice, as he'd have indicted the person/people who did it - they had no presidential protection, or it's one of the indictments that he's passed off to another AG.

#3 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-05-16 07:14 PM | Reply

#2 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Ever seen a puffer fish?

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2019-05-16 07:14 PM | Reply

Hmm...not AG, another DA.

#5 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-05-16 07:15 PM | Reply

Either Mueller felt that it did not rise to the level of obstruction of justice, as he'd have indicted the person/people who did it - they had no presidential protection, or it's one of the indictments that he's passed off to another AG.

You do realize there are multiple ongoing cases that have not been publicly revealed yet, don't you? The report is full of redactions indicating just that so why are you clueless that this is likely one or more of them?

#6 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-16 07:18 PM | Reply

You do realize there are multiple ongoing cases that have not been publicly revealed yet, don't you? - #6 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-16 07:18 PM
Obviously I realize that. Which is why I directly mentioned that it was one of the 2 options. "or it's one of the indictments that he's passed off to another DA"
You even quoted it in your reply. Were you unable to comprehend a simple sentence?
Do you take time to edit your posts to make them so foolish, or does it just come naturally to you?

#7 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-05-16 08:41 PM | Reply

When did Obstruction of Justice become a crime?

-- -- the "Rule of Law" gang

#8 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-05-16 08:58 PM | Reply

It was preordained that ------------------ would grunt out a cankles deflection.

#9 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2019-05-16 09:02 PM | Reply

#7

Sorry I missed the second part of your comment - which totally obliterated the part I focused on, rendering it moot.

I wasn't expecting someone to waste time speculating about something that was obviously not the case.

#10 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-16 09:04 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

#10 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-16 09:04 PM
I got your sarcasm, but I'd like to say that I'm sorry that I implied you were unable to comprehend the sentence and that your posts were foolish. We all make simple mistakes at times.

#11 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-05-16 09:08 PM | Reply

#9

There is no known investigation into either Hillary Clinton nor her campaign for anything criminal. I keep wondering what exactly she was supposed to have done that would finally find her charged after the 35+ year-long true witch hunts that have landed ZERO indictments at last count.

Even stepping in and funding the completion of Steele's raw intelligence dossier is not illegal in any way whatsoever since the campaign never even used a single word of it against Trump before the election. I guess just the compilation of raw intelligence from foreign sources about a US-based international businessman about what he did in THEIR countries HAS to be illegal in the eyes of those ignoring the scores of illicit activities of Trumpers still continuing on a daily basis to obstruct Congress' constitutional role of oversight and investigation of executive acts that can lead to impeachment proceedings.

So confusing.....

#12 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-16 09:12 PM | Reply

#11

Thank you. We poke at each other when we come at topics from different perspectives but having opinions - even wrong ones - is better than not knowing anything about important topics.

#13 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-16 09:14 PM | Reply

Don't make nice with Tony, Avigdore.

He's both a Pacers fan and a Notre Dame fan.

He deserves to be ostracized.

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-05-16 09:22 PM | Reply

Trump's personal lawyer committed obstruction of justice on behalf of Trump.
i.imgur.com

#15 | Posted by bored at 2019-05-16 09:46 PM | Reply

Month old news is so very exciting. I love the pretense that this is some new information. It's in the Mueller report. It's been known for a month now and people are just now reading through it? That imgur link above? It's a picture of the Mueller report.


After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

#16 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-05-17 06:27 AM | Reply

#16

But some of it was redacted until yesterday so no one could understand the details as they can now. This is one of the reasons why the Democrats are demanding to see an unredacted version so that the totality of Mueller's findings can be understood as he wrote them, not as Barr and Trump continue to mischaracterize them, knowing full well that the unedited report is far more damning against Trump and his associates than the public has been led to believe.

It may be the difference between impeachment proceedings commencing or not.

#17 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-17 08:36 AM | Reply

#17: That's not Grand Jury information, it's been available to Congressional leadership for some time now. Have any of the Democrats bothered to read the thing, yet?

#18 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-05-17 08:41 AM | Reply

And the conclusion you quote from the report summation was likely written under cover of the DOJ policy that precluded them from charging a sitting President, especially since they intentionally did not dig into particular leads and demand specific testimony needed to help them reach such findings as they would have under any other circumstances, as myriad commenters have pointed out repeatedly.

They left such investigation and fact finding to Congress who has the constitutional right of holding this President accountable through the impeachment process. The Mueller report lays out multiple avenues for doing just that based on the copious amounts of evidence and findings it lists should Congress decide to dig deeper and try to make such a case.

To quote the summation as one of finality belies the obvious intent of why it was written as it was - and toward what purpose - when it expressly denies that Trump can be exonerated of obstruction in Mueller's eyes based on the incomplete investigation that he undertook.

#19 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-05-17 08:46 AM | Reply

And the conclusion you quote from the report summation was likely written under cover of the DOJ policy that precluded them from charging a sitting President
The quote was 2 sentences long. The 2nd sentence directly disproves your very first sentence. I don't mean to be too snarky, but did you not read both sentences again?

since they intentionally did not dig into particular leads and demand specific testimony needed to help them reach such findings
Please send me a link to anyone from Mueller's office or anywhere in the report where it states that they chose to not follow particular leads to identify criminal conduct. I do recall in the report where Mueller explained that he didn't require further written or oral testimony from Trump because he already had enough evidence to determine his state of mind, but such a clear indication of dereliction of duty should have been a bomb-shell headline on all of the news outlets.

as myriad commenters have pointed out
Oh, so people guessing at Mueller's intentions?

the obvious intent of why it was written as it was
The intent was to report the evidence so someone else could make the determination of legality and congress could make a determination on impeachment.

#20 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-05-17 09:42 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort