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

91–100 of 121 posts

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

#91

Post by dr_ick »

mozumder wrote: post #89
dr_ick wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought we're looking at Hillary being connected to Saudi Arabia for her financing as well as giving Russia 20% of U.S. uranium in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation, as well as Podesta ties to a Russian entity called Rusnano, and how Obama used a slush fund to move money to leftist hate groups. Did you want all this in writing from Hillary and notarized that she did this? Because that's not how it wo…

Right. That's why government already investigated this and cleared her. Hillary Clinton appreciates your support and making it clear that Trump is the problem now. Let's now focus on Trump, since he is the government official that is being investigated for corruption now. What other problems do you think Trump will show?

I think this will continue to show what it has from the beginning:

The Democrats can't handle losing an election they thought they had in the bag. So they are going to throw a fit and look for a scapegoat. All the while shifting more and more to the regressive left, abandoning the hardworking blue collar Americans in the middle.

There is a reason the Rust Belt voted Trump, and it wasn't Russia.

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

#92

Post by aggie »

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.

His lawyers could have convinced him to ask for immunity if there was even a slight chance of legal trouble. He may also only have some minor dirt to spill, so he's happy throwing some staffer under the bus.

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

#93

Post by CalChris »

aggie wrote: post #92
bbatha wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

His lawyers could have convinced him to ask for immunity if there was even a slight chance of legal trouble. He may also only have some minor dirt to spill, so he's happy throwing some staffer under the bus.

Yes, we know that. His hypocrisy still reeks.

And great. Give him immunity and get him in front of the Senate and House committees. If, as you assert, he has only minor dirt on some small player that will come out. And the immunity itself will save everyone time and money.

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

#94

Post by nyolfen »

jMyles wrote: post #90
nyolfen wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

forgive me if i'm being uncharitable, but it comes across as if you're being willfully obtuse. "messed with" means hacking and possible criminal coordination between a campaign and russian officials. if it came out that the clinton campaign had coordinated with [insert historic rival] intelligence, people would be calling for executions.

> if it came out that the clinton campaign had coordinated with [insert historic rival] intelligence, people would be calling for executions. ...not sure which Clinton you mean here, but if you meant Bill, it's quite likely that he did indeed coordinate with Saudi Intelligence in a reasonably similar fashion. ...and so did the man he defeated, George H.W. Bush. http://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/23/world/clinton-and-his-…

"having close ties" is not "illegally coordinating an election campaign", and saudi is not a rival of the united states -- it's been among its strongest allies since fdr. but that's neither here nor there and i'm not interested in defending either of the clintons. you're trying to dodge the issue when it's spelled out. you're arguing in bad faith.

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

#95

Post by dwaltrip »

toyg wrote: post #83
wyldfire wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the level of infighting in the US and Europe now is different from anything I've seen over the last couple of decades. The democratization of media is a net benefit but it helped bring about a world's worth of people seeking out news that matches their world view. It's made it very easy to spawn animus and make everything into an "us vs them" issue. I think Russia is overtly and covertly involved in an effort…

> The democratization of media is a net benefit but it helped bring about [...] We are living through the modern equivalent of when Guthenberg's technology allowed people to print their own bibles. You might remember how that one turned out: a huge religious schism, civil wars, large-scale terrorism, new laws enshrining religious discrimination which lasted for centuries... I'm not saying this is what will happen; I…

Very interesting comparison, thanks for sharing it. That paradigm-shift may indeed be one of the best analogs that we have to the current on-going changes in human communication.

There was a really good Hardcore History episode that told the story of one town that was an intense focal point of religious/cultural fervor and violence during that time period. The entire city was overtaken by multiple waves of extremely radical Anabaptists, and then was literally besieged by an army for multiple months as the guy in charge of the city tried to regain control. It was a spectacular story, with lots of juicy details. Dan Carlin does a great job of contextualizing and providing perspective, as usual.

P.S. I had to retype this comment as I accidentally deleted it while attempting to copy part of it... It's amazing (and frustrating​) that Android chrome hasn't implemented text edit undo yet.

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

#96

Post by hackuser »

opo wrote: post #60
hackuser wrote: post #48

Has the United States ever convicted someone on the level of National Security Advisor (i.e., effectively a member of the cabinet, such as Secretary of Defense), or even put them on trial? Petraeus got a slap on the wrist, but for actions while he was a General. In other countries, even the heads of state get put on trial. Off the top of my head, it's happened relatively recently in France and Israel. In the U.S., I…

>...In the U.S., I can't think of even a member of the cabinet being tried; It will be hard to beat the Nixon administration for convictions: 2 attorney generals, chief of staff, 2 white house counsels, undersecretary of transportation, secretary to the president, special counsel to the president, secretary of commerce and the vice president! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_polit...

Hey, that's a great page that I never imagined existed. I stand corrected; plenty of Cabinet secretaries were convicted, as well as 8 federal judges in 30 years (and therefore I assume many more in history).

Still, only one VP (Agnew, which I should have remembered) and of course no Presidents.

Thanks.

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

#97

Post by hackuser »

a3n wrote: post #74
hackuser wrote: post #48

Has the United States ever convicted someone on the level of National Security Advisor (i.e., effectively a member of the cabinet, such as Secretary of Defense), or even put them on trial? Petraeus got a slap on the wrist, but for actions while he was a General. In other countries, even the heads of state get put on trial. Off the top of my head, it's happened relatively recently in France and Israel. In the U.S., I…

Nixon's VP, Spiro Agnew, received a $10K fine and 3 years probation after pleading no contest to tax evasion from accepting bribes. IANAL, don't know if that counts as "conviction." He was disbarred for his plea of no contest.

> don't know if that counts as "conviction."

It does according to the standard I intended, FWIW. I don't think you can be sentenced if you aren't found guilty.

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

#98

Post by dogma1138 »

maxerickson wrote: post #86
hackuser wrote: post #48

Has the United States ever convicted someone on the level of National Security Advisor (i.e., effectively a member of the cabinet, such as Secretary of Defense), or even put them on trial? Petraeus got a slap on the wrist, but for actions while he was a General. In other countries, even the heads of state get put on trial. Off the top of my head, it's happened relatively recently in France and Israel. In the U.S., I…

Iran-Contra was a pretty high level scandal. And Bill Clinton was put on trial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

Impeachment is not a trial.

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

#99

Post by rhizome »

pessimizer wrote: post #49
rhizome wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd guess he'll plead the Fifth.

Can you do that if you're offered immunity?

I believe that, generally, immunity deals are constructed to require complete candor and truthfulness. It may have come up in the Lewis Libby trial. IANAL.

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

#100

Post by maxerickson »

dogma1138 wrote: post #98
maxerickson wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iran-Contra was a pretty high level scandal. And Bill Clinton was put on trial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

Impeachment is not a trial.

Okay, but Clinton was subsequently tried in the Senate, as mentioned on that page: Clinton was subsequently acquitted of these charges by the Senate on February 12, 1999.
Post reply on HN