(05-10-2020 11:07 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-10-2020 09:46 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(05-09-2020 07:47 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-09-2020 03:45 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Regarding Flynn and the Logan Act, I'm all for revising or replacing the Logan Act with something more reflective of modern times. I agree with the arguments presented here that no one could possibly believe that Flynn represented the current administration, as opposed to the incoming administration. At the same time, I think there are definitely some things you don't want incoming administrations to do or promise that will undermine the actions of the outgoing administration. IMHO, what Flynn is alleged to have done re: the Logan Act fall into the gray area of what should not be prosecuted even if it was possibly a violation of the law (based on the age of the law, how rarely the law was used, and discretion of the prosecutors).

Of course, they didn't actually prosecute Flynn for violating the Logan Act, they prosecuted him for, and he plead guilty to, lying to the FBI.

How 'rarely' the law used? I mean when you have to resort to a law that has its use recorded in instances per *century* and STILL dont get a result in whole numbers less than 3 there is a real gd issue.

When you *have* to resort to that law to keep an otherwise 'shut' case open, again, there is a real fing problem.

When one cant even record a *single* conviction in the 221 years it has been around, again, there is a *real* fing issue with its use.

So ... we agree but you are being salty anyway? Also, if it isn’t illegal or at least unwise then why lie about it? Second thought ... I don’t really care. Also, you seem to care about this a lot. My new goal in life is to care about more things to the same extent you care about the alleged miscarriage of justice against Michael Flynn. You have some serious passion!

I find it amazing that the same set of voices who crow to the almighty about Trump being oh so corrupt are seemingly absolutely (perhaps willingly) to that same level of supposed corrupt behavior emanating from the Obama White House.

Again, Democratic double standards at their finest.

Quote:unwise then why lie about it?

Funny. Thats not what the *original* 302 said. But again gloss over the fact that the original 302 was redone weeks after the fact to indicate otherwise.

I am firmly against any corruption *and* use of the natsec arm as a weapon against political opponents. I find it amazingly hypocritical of those who jump up and down and scream at the top of their lungs about the horrendous corruption of Trump, yet when the cover is taken off their demigod, the response is much the same as yours.

Again, Democratic double standards at their finest.

You seem to be under the dramatic misperception that I have done some deep dive into the Flynn case and surrounding evidence, including reading the 302. You are wrong. I haven't and I have no interest in doing so. I haven't weighed in significantly in the discussion here for precisely that reason. No double-standard because I haven't looked at this in any detail at all. I generally agree with you on the Logan Act. I also believe lying to law enforcement officials is not good. My knowledge and interest in the story (to date) kind of ends there. Sorry if you were hoping I would do some deep dive so that you could excoriate me, but that isn't on today's to-do list.