Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 121 posts

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#111

Post by gnaritas »

dr_ick wrote: post #110
gnaritas wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a deflection of the topic is unworthy of hacker news. Trump is the president, discussion about Trump's negatives are not an excuse to deflect with "what about Obama", he is not the topic. Giving a speech is in no way comparable to the topic at hand anyway.

It sets a precedent that the left does want to acknowledge. There was likely collusion between Obama and "Remainers". Obama made a speech with a threat that was intended to directly influence a vote in a foreign country. Where was the outrage from the Democrats and media when this was done? Former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell has stated that he has seen no evidence of collusions between Trump and the Kremlin. "…

You're again trying to fly off on a diversion of the topic, I'm not playing. This is not a discussion about Obama, period. Nor are public speeches that influence foreign countries remotely comparable to collusion to affect "our" elections. Your continual citing of only the evidence that supports your politics is nothing more than partisan deflection, you are not engaging in honest debate.

It's like you don't even read the links you post

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...

There's plenty right there in your own source that warrants investigation into Trump simply from the already proved contacts that have occurred between the Russians and Trump's associates. That they have not found direct evidence of Trump's involvement yet is not a reason to stop an investigation who's purpose is simply to find out what did actually happen.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#112

Post by dr_ick »

gnaritas wrote: post #105
jMyles wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the part you are missing is that the vast majority (like 65%) don't support or respect this President at all. Of all the terrible things the government has done in the past 1 / 10 / 100 years, I don't think that a candidate coordinating with Russia about which fake news to publish is even worth mentioning. If Congress has the guts to investigate the Steele dossier (which alleged Trump traded eased regula…

Treason is not a distraction, it's as serious as a crime gets.

Treason? You come to Hacker News to imply that the President of the United States has committed Treason. What proof do you have? This is pure slander.

Sorry your preferred candidate lost the election. Next time don't let violent, intolerant, elitist, smug liberals and celebrities take over your political party. Democrats used to be about Unions and the working family. Appears that era is over.

As noted in previous comments... There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#113

Post by dr_ick »

gnaritas wrote: post #109
dr_ick wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then lets discuss Trump without deflecting to unproven and debunked Russian claims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20... Former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell has stated that he has seen no evidence of collusions between Trump and the Kremlin. "On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all," Morell said.[156] James…

> Here are the facts of today: None of those three facts are remotely relevant to whether or not Trump colluded with Russians, you are again being partisan and even mentioning those unrelated facts proves you're too partisan to have a real discussion. And smoke is more than enough to justify a proper investigation.

In a thread above you imply that Trump committed Treason. Now you are accusing me of being "too partisan" for a real discussion.

Pot meet kettle.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#114

Post by dr_ick »

gnaritas wrote: post #111
dr_ick wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sets a precedent that the left does want to acknowledge. There was likely collusion between Obama and "Remainers". Obama made a speech with a threat that was intended to directly influence a vote in a foreign country. Where was the outrage from the Democrats and media when this was done? Former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell has stated that he has seen no evidence of collusions between Trump and the Kremlin. "…

You're again trying to fly off on a diversion of the topic, I'm not playing. This is not a discussion about Obama, period. Nor are public speeches that influence foreign countries remotely comparable to collusion to affect "our" elections. Your continual citing of only the evidence that supports your politics is nothing more than partisan deflection, you are not engaging in honest debate. It's like you don't even rea…

I'm happy this is an ongoing investigation. I hope the Democrats keep pushing it. I suspect they will continue to find nothing and the public will become more and more aware of the hypocrisy on the left.

This also keeps the Democrats from addressing real issues in their party. They ran a bad campaign. Instead of owning it and finding ways to address issues with American voters, they have found a scapegoat in Russia. Good Job!

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#115

Post by gnaritas »

dr_ick wrote: post #114
gnaritas wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're again trying to fly off on a diversion of the topic, I'm not playing. This is not a discussion about Obama, period. Nor are public speeches that influence foreign countries remotely comparable to collusion to affect "our" elections. Your continual citing of only the evidence that supports your politics is nothing more than partisan deflection, you are not engaging in honest debate. It's like you don't even rea…

I'm happy this is an ongoing investigation. I hope the Democrats keep pushing it. I suspect they will continue to find nothing and the public will become more and more aware of the hypocrisy on the left. This also keeps the Democrats from addressing real issues in their party. They ran a bad campaign. Instead of owning it and finding ways to address issues with American voters, they have found a scapegoat in Russia.…

You cant' seem to get over the incorrect idea that the dems are just being sore losers; that's childish and not at all what is occurring.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#116

Post by dr_ick »

gnaritas wrote: post #115
dr_ick wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm happy this is an ongoing investigation. I hope the Democrats keep pushing it. I suspect they will continue to find nothing and the public will become more and more aware of the hypocrisy on the left. This also keeps the Democrats from addressing real issues in their party. They ran a bad campaign. Instead of owning it and finding ways to address issues with American voters, they have found a scapegoat in Russia.…

You cant' seem to get over the incorrect idea that the dems are just being sore losers; that's childish and not at all what is occurring.

What is childish is implying the President of the United States committed treason with nothing to back it up.

Time will tell, but at least some Democrats are starting to address the real issue, and not placing all the blame on the boogeyman (Russia):

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/30/politics/joe-biden-donald-trum...

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#117

Post by gnaritas »

dr_ick wrote: post #113
gnaritas wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here are the facts of today: None of those three facts are remotely relevant to whether or not Trump colluded with Russians, you are again being partisan and even mentioning those unrelated facts proves you're too partisan to have a real discussion. And smoke is more than enough to justify a proper investigation.

In a thread above you imply that Trump committed Treason. Now you are accusing me of being "too partisan" for a real discussion. Pot meet kettle.

No, I implied that treason is a serious crime, nothing more. I do not know if he's guilty or not, that's why there's an investigation. There's enough shady shit clearly going on that the truth has to be found.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#118

Post by gnaritas »

dr_ick wrote: post #116
gnaritas wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cant' seem to get over the incorrect idea that the dems are just being sore losers; that's childish and not at all what is occurring.

What is childish is implying the President of the United States committed treason with nothing to back it up. Time will tell, but at least some Democrats are starting to address the real issue, and not placing all the blame on the boogeyman (Russia): http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/30/politics/joe-biden-donald-trum...

I haven't implied that, you're simply reading what I'm saying via partisan eyes. I merely stated treason is a serious crime.

And no, Clinton's campaign is not the real issue. She lost, that's over, no one is questing that. The issue is whether Trump and team were involved or not with the Russian interference with the election. No amount of deflecting back to Clinton will change the issue.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#119

Post by gnaritas »

dr_ick wrote: post #112
gnaritas wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Treason is not a distraction, it's as serious as a crime gets.

Treason? You come to Hacker News to imply that the President of the United States has committed Treason. What proof do you have? This is pure slander. Sorry your preferred candidate lost the election. Next time don't let violent, intolerant, elitist, smug liberals and celebrities take over your political party. Democrats used to be about Unions and the working family. Appears that era is over. As noted in previous co…

I implied no such thing, read what I wrote 50 times if you must until you see that I merely said treason is a serious crime, not a distraction. I didn't not imply he was guilty, we don't know that one way or the other; hence the investigation.

You really need to learn to have a discussion with someone, without blaming them for all of the perceived faults of the democrats. You don't know my political party, nor my preferred candidate, you're just assuming everything as if everyone who doesn't like Trump is the same.

> There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia.

No one thinks it does; the Rust Belt is just gullible and fell for a con man promising them things that cannot occur, those jobs cannot come back, they no longer exist. They heard what they wanted to hear because they're unable to hear the truth.

Re: Ex-Trump adviser Flynn seeks immunity for testimony in Russia probe: WSJ

#120

Post by ericcumbee »

bbatha wrote: post #67
hackuser wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a nice gotcha, but Flynn isn't an attorney and is known for saying many crazy things even in his field of expertise.

He hasn't been offered immunity yet, he's the one asking guilt. By the logic of his own quote he only want it if he was guilty.

I'm not so sure... Thinking about the Valerie Plame leak case, Scooter Libby the VP's CoS was convicted for giving false testimony and obstruction. Those convictions stem from conflicting statements about how he knew Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.

If you were Flynn and thought you had a card that would keep you out of jail to play in a game where if you mis-remember how you know a seemingly trivial piece of information you go to jail... would'nt you try to play that card?

Post reply on HN