I assume your question is rhetorical? I am interested in EODguy's response to my question. Would like to know if it his conclusion or, if not, what information brought him to that conclusion.

The thing about placing blame is, you can’t just blame one party. You have to blame everyone who fxxked up.

There’s plenty of that on both sides of the Pacific. If you have been following the news ( I listen to NPR), I know about the virus in January. The information I got in January has me concerned enough that I started buying N95 masks and sanitizers in that month.

The problem with today’s news is, depending on which channel you subscribe to, you will get different versions, and different emphasis on the same news.

NPR tends to have a more complete view of the facts without any unwanted opinions force fed on you.

The news was here as early as January. When I had to meet my kids guidance counselor and my attorney I made it clear to them that I prefer not to shake their hands. They were fine about my concern and we even had a discussion about the pandemic on the other side of the world.

I think even main stream news was describing something pretty worrisome. Though I whole heartedly agree with you. Supplementing the national news outlets with your own research and other news outlets is a must. Biases exist all over (including npr).

I don't blame one party. But I certainly blame different parties at different levels and for different reasons

Try this....

Flynn was the incoming NSA and that during the transition he spoke to Russian ambassador Kislyak (remember as transition this is legal/common and his job) the "investigation was whether he violated the Logan Act (illegal for individuals to conduct business on behalf of the US government without authorization) and since it was his actual job for the government then there should never have been an investigation since all it could produce is known to most people as "fruit of the poisonous tree" as for the "Did you discuss xxx?" so that people understand if you aren't authorized to have been on that conversation, FBI or not Flynn would have been in legal jeopardy just for saying "yes" and verifying the contents of the call and the need to know is not determined by the FBI by Flynn and the (at that time) President elect. Couple that with the 302's saying "Logan Act or try to get him to lie?"

I point out an article on the Hill website which is NOT a ra-ra-ra Trump website

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...-cant-prove-it

Also the link to the 302's (file too large for upload here)

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/...92.188.0_8.pdf

I don't care whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, Trump supporter or Trump hater as long as they believe and support the Constitution and the Rights of the People not just for "their" side.

Also a perusal of a dictionary may be in order as "Conspiracy Theory" denotes a belief without evidence of something to be a fact.

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

If you want to go off of that kind statement then...
Who was in charge of the FBI and DoJ for these investigations? Who appointed them? Who recommended them? Which party? It seems more than a little suspicious that every person was either on tape against the incoming administration or belonged to the previous administration.

Do I think that there is something fishy going on in many of these things? Yes.

Do I think all of them were "planned" out in advance? No, but I do think that at various times people have called dust, smoke to infer a fire and that's what divides people into camps since we all want to believe our assumptions or perceptions are true.

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

The article you posted from The Hill is an opinion by Andrew McCarthy. McCarty is a supporter of Trump and has written several other articles biased toward republican views.

Flynn accepted a plea deal. Flynn admitted he willfully and knowingly lied to the FBI (twice) in court as did his attorneys when they entered his guilty plea. Flynn's new attorney challenged the conviction and the judge rejected the challenge in a 92 page judgement.

:iagree:

:thumbup:

Wow....[emoji2959]

Not one thought spared as to WHY he pled guilty (FBI threats to go after his family) and not even a raised eyebrow over the agents own words... (goal? investigate or get him to lie?) and how even 1 of the 2 interviewing agents said Flynn wasn't trying to lie but couldn't remember all of the details but he was overruled by the other interviewer Peter Strzok and that it was intentional...

I admit it's an opinion piece but HOW disingenuous can you be to completely ignore the facts that were stated to include what's above and just say it's opinion so it means nothing.

I would also remind folks that Judge Sullivan was made comments in this case before showing that he was not being impartial to Flynn in court previously and apologized for it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/u...entencing.html


A similar example would be:

Police think that you committed a crime but aren't sure what. During the investigation they don't find anything one way or the other and come talk to you and ask, "Did you drive over the speed limit 27 days ago or was it 25 days ago?" You not knowing they found a tape of you speeding 29 days ago and thinking I did speed but probably not more than 5-7mph say " I was speeding a little but it was 25 days ago."

Congratulations! You have committed what is known as a process crime if speaking to a federal agent or a police officer doing any kind of investigation.

Now they (investigators) say we are using this process "crime" to expand our investigation and we are going to be using similar methods as we have a talk with your family.... Unless, you admit that gave us the wrong information...

You suck it up and say yep I told you the wrong information (thereby meeting their agreement) protecting your family and then you hire lawyers to get the court to see that what really happened wasn't some intentional attempt to cover up speeding and once the truth came out due to notes from the investigators directly that you didn't do it intentionally and they had no reason to even begin their investigation you withdrawal your plea and the investigators bosses back it up saying it was shady AF. But now the judge says he wants you charged for your coerced plea being "perjury"....[emoji848]

Yeah, that seems totally legit!!

https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-l...the-venom-out/

As was pointed out for the past few years "we must trust the system and the investigators" but apparently only if they are on the side someone is supporting or else it's all BS, yet when investigators and the system say that there were mistakes made it's now "BS" to trust the system or the investigators are doing...[emoji849][emoji849] Hello hypocrites!!

Every American should understand that one miscarriage of justice used against someone who you dislike, hate or disagree with just means that when the worm turns it will be your turn.

We've seen that happen before and it ONLY cost an estimated 85 million lives.....

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. ~ Martin Niemöller

Niemöller’s belief was that Germans had been complicit through their silence in the Nazi imprisonment, persecution, and murder of millions of people and he spent the last 7 years of the war in a nazi concentration camp for finally standing up against the nazi's.

People that want a society where they support shit like this due to someone being part of an opposing group should be called out for it, because they are no better than nazi's, klansmen or supporters of the pogroms that happened worldwide and that they would even keep up support for such tells you that this can only end in bloodshed if it continues.

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

We are straying from the topic here folks. The goal is to provide useful information in combating this virus pandemic.

Please leave ur political opinions off this thread.

In other news, a satellite city in Los Angeles County (La Vern) is finally allowing the use of public tennis courts again.

Last Sunday morning at 6:30AM I got to play my first set of singles tennis in over 3 months.

It's almost comparable to seeing a beautiful bikini clad woman swimming towards the island you got stranded on.

Nothing beats the thrill and high of naturally released dopamine after a few hours of hitting that fuzzy little yellow ball.

Getting a good workout to improve your cardiovascular fitness and maintain your metabolism, while having fun? Can't beat tennis!

I seem to remember a few members here also enjoy playing. Hope your state has now allowed you to play as well.

As always, when out in the public, observe the social distance and keep your mask on except during play time.

Keeping fit, sleep well and maintaining a balanced lifestyle will boost your immune system to better fight off infections of all kinds.