ABC suspends Brian Ross for.... #fake news

Let me get this straight....

The "damning evidence" against Trump that entire leftoid media establishment, the twatterverse, the War Room trollosphere led by @Rational Poster, and the Democratic Party have been babbling about for the past week turned out to be #fakenews?

I'm shocked.

Dems had better figure out how to get white working class voters in the rustbelt to like them again for they're going to get annihilated in 2020.
{<huh}
 
If a presidential candidate tells someone in his campaign to meet with the Russians. it looks suspiciously like some kind of collusion. When the president elect asks hi national security advisor to meet with the Russians, it looks like they are both doing their jobs.

It's still plausible that Flynn will spill the beans and get Trump impeached,etc etc. But this specific detail changes the tone of the story a great deal and makes that outcome seem far less likely.

And what if both happened?

The campaign was in touch with Russians, before, during, and/or after the election?

That still ignores that they lied about all their contacts with Russians before, during, and/or after the election.
 
And what if both happened?

The campaign was in touch with Russians, before, during, and/or after the election?

That still ignores that they lied about all their contacts with Russians before, during, and/or after the election.

If both happened, meaning that Trump instructed Flynn to make contact with the Russians both during the campaign and after he won the election, then I think that would be significant and the kind of thing that
1. Ought to be investigated closely, and
2. Ought to be reported widely, and
3. Could potentially have massive political fallout up to and including impeachment.

The obvious problem that even ABC recognizes is that Ross reported what Trump did as president elect as something he did as a presidential candidate, which is a significant error in this context.
 
If both happened, meaning that Trump instructed Flynn to make contact with the Russians both during the campaign and after he won the election, then I think that would be significant and the kind of thing that
1. Ought to be investigated closely, and
2. Ought to be reported widely, and
3. Could potentially have massive political fallout up to and including impeachment.

The obvious problem that even ABC recognizes is that Ross reported what Trump did as president elect as something he did as a presidential candidate, which is a significant error in this context.

This is really all it boils down to. Mueller isn't just doing Flynn a solid here by offering him a lesser charge.

Mueller wouldn't offer a plea deal for such a lesser crime to Flynn unless;

1) He had information on someone above him in the executive branch hierarchy that Mueller deemed incriminating. The only people above him in the hierarchy are Pence and Trump.

2) He had information on multiple people in the executive branch hierarchy that were equal to Flynn. (Sessions, for example)
 
This is really all it boils down to. Mueller isn't just doing Flynn a solid here by offering him a lesser charge.

Mueller wouldn't offer a plea deal for such a lesser crime to Flynn unless;

1) He had information on someone above him in the executive branch hierarchy that Mueller deemed incriminating. The only people above him in the hierarchy are Pence and Trump.

2) He had information on multiple people in the executive branch hierarchy that were equal to Flynn. (Sessions)

Well first off, you are changing the subject. I don't mind, but it ought to be pointed out that the hypothetical you raised is something we have no evidence for at this point, despite what Ross was reporting.

Second, I think your reasoning here is generally sound. It certainly is plausible that Mueller is slapping Flynn on the wrist because he knows Flynn can help him land much bigger fish. But it's equally plausible that Flynn gets slapped on the wrist precisely because Mueller has nothing else. We'll have to wait and see I guess.
 
Well first off, you are changing the subject. I don't mind, but it ought to be pointed out that the hypothetical you raised is something we have no evidence for at this point, despite what Ross was reporting.

Second, I think your reasoning here is generally sound. It certainly is plausible that Mueller is slapping Flynn on the wrist because he knows Flynn can help him land much bigger fish. But it's equally plausible that Flynn gets slapped on the wrist precisely because Mueller has nothing else. We'll have to wait and see I guess.

Yeah, but we already know for sure that Flynn has FARA violations as well, this is confirmed, as well as potential involvement with a kidnapping plot with the Turkish government.

Basically, if Mueller was just settling with what he had because he had nothing else, he would have thrown the book at Flynn, not given him a slap on the wrist.

I don't see talking about this as changing the subject, talking about this is an attempt to change the subject.

The subject hasn't changed, Flynn still has a plea deal with Mueller.
 
How did @HereticBD get btfo?

<{vega}>

You’re the one that seems to not understand the significance of the distinction between Flynn contacting Putin on Trump’s orders before vs after the election.

I hate Trump as much as anyone, but if Flynn contacted Putin after the election it is in fact a “nothingburger”.
The report said before the election.






Before.
 
Yeah, but we already know for sure that Flynn has FARA violations as well, this is confirmed, as well as potential involvement with a kidnapping plot with the Turkish government.

Basically, if Mueller was just settling with what he had because he had nothing else, he would have thrown the book at Flynn, not given him a slap on the wrist.

I don't see talking about this as changing the subject, talking about this is an attempt to change the subject.

The subject hasn't changed, Flynn still has a plea deal with Mueller.

1. No, the subject of this thread is that a major media figure misrepresented significant facts in this story which led to his suspension. It's a side issue worth examining.

2. As for whether Mueller is using Flynn to get to Trump or someone else, I already said I found it plausible. I also find it plausible that he isn't throwing the book at Flynn because he doesn't think he can make most of it stick, but he's charging him with a process crime because it is politically unacceptable that nothing com e out of all this, even if there isn't much to the Russian story.

You see one likely scenario; I see two. Time will tell.
 
The report said before the election.






Before.

Yes, it said "candidate Trump", implying it was before the election. Which was a false report. Which is why they had to correct the story. Which is why the newscaster is on suspension.

Can you count to potato?
 
So asking a foreign power to help you win an election is okay if you are president?
Do you have ears? Honest question. I think some closed-captioner must be trolling you.
 
Back
Top