Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday March 31 2017, @01:04PM   Printer-friendly
from the trump-card dept.

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has reportedly offered to testify about President Trump's campaign and Russia:

President Trump's former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has reportedly told the FBI that he is willing to testify about the Trump campaign's potential ties to Russia, in exchange for immunity from prosecution, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Flynn resigned in February, after it was reported that he misled White House staff on his interactions with Russia and had discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak ahead of President Trump's inauguration. The Journal reported, citing officials familiar with the matter, that the FBI and the House and Senate Intelligence committees that are investigating Russia's attempts to interfere in the U.S. election have not taken his lawyers up on the offer.

Flynn's lawyer said in a statement that "General Flynn certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit."

[...] In September, criticizing Hillary Clinton over former aides being given immunity deals as part of an investigation into her private email server, Flynn said, "When you're given immunity that means you've probably committed a crime."

Also at the LA Times, the Washington Post, Bloomberg, NYT, and Politico.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday March 31 2017, @05:25PM (4 children)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday March 31 2017, @05:25PM (#487183) Journal

    What would be fair prosecution?

    9 separate, multi-million dollar, investigations into the evidence-free Benghazi scandal.

    What is "unfair prosecution?"

    A single investigation into the evidence-full Russia scandal.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by shortscreen on Friday March 31 2017, @07:56PM (3 children)

    by shortscreen (2252) on Friday March 31 2017, @07:56PM (#487284) Journal

    There is no evidence. There is no scandal. The coordinated Russophobia campaign is just that. And it's coming from the same idiots who insist that anyone disagreeing with them MUST be racist/xenophobic/bigoted/etc.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday March 31 2017, @09:06PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday March 31 2017, @09:06PM (#487328) Journal

      There Is More Than Circumstantial Evidence Now - Senate Intelligence Committee Member Adam Schiff [theatlantic.com]

      "...there is evidence that is “not circumstantial” of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government."

      He is privvy to classified information that not even all the other members of the House are allowed to see. Expect it to come out at the trial and not before then.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 31 2017, @10:32PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 31 2017, @10:32PM (#487359)

      > There is no evidence. There is no scandal. The coordinated Russophobia campaign is just that.

      Dude. Trump himself said Russia interfered with the election.

      “As far as hacking, I think it was Russia,” [washingtonpost.com]

      And that wasn't just another case of meaningless word salad spilling from his mouth, Rinse Prius confirmed it too:
      Trump acknowledges Russia role in U.S. election hacking: aide [reuters.com]

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday March 31 2017, @11:55PM

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday March 31 2017, @11:55PM (#487383) Homepage

        Do you believe anything people say, including people who love being blatantly sarcastic and offensive? If so, then I have a 10-inch dick I gotta show you sometime.

        Does trump's comments, even the ones about "I hope they have Hillary's missing E-mails" constitute a confession or breach of classified information? Does it mean that Trump is going to blow his chances being president and potentially leaking classified information by making an asinine comment even though it's quite possible he had no idea who had the e-mails?

        I'm gonna say again what everybody else with half a brain is saying already -- the leftists fifth-columnists are shitting their pants and desperate. They are desperately grasping for diversions. There's something stinky going on and they're scared to death about it being discovered -- though it seems that there are a few Republicans involved in that shady business as well -- and I hope it's big and the lid gets blown off of it. I'm thinking any combination of Hastings, 9/11, Benghazi, MH17, using the refugee crisis to deliberately destabilize Europe to prevent a threat to American hegemony, or far more nefarious plots that were planned or put into motion. Good thing Wikileaks has more leaks coming.

        Suppose that the communications did involve offering concessions or improving relations with Russia, is that a bad thing? To prevent conflict? For fuck's sake, it's not like Flynn gave them the self-destruct codes to the nukes. What I think Trump should do is team up with the Russkies and stomp the Islamic savages of the Middle-East, then all White nations work to expel the Islamic filth from within their borders.