Ex-national security adviser 'to defy Senate Russia inquiry'

[Felya]

Yeah, it's been almost an hour and nobody has volunteered to do mental gymnastics to defend this yet. We already know from past experience that there's no action too low for them to defend, so what gives?

This doesn't need to be defended. The only issue here is Trump's comments from the campaign. It looks bad in the public eye, but the point is to not admit guilt. The use of the 5th is completely justified, regardless of how it looks to the public.

[Garnier Fructis]

This doesn't need to be defended. The only issue here is Trump's comments from the campaign. It looks bad in the public eye, but the point is to not admit guilt. The use of the 5th is completely justified, regardless of how it looks to the public.

Oh, sure. I just want to hear this from the same people who parroted Trump's nonsense about the 5th. I want to see the forced hypocrisy.

[Xarkan]

Oh, sure. I just want to hear this from the same people who parroted Trump's nonsense about the 5th. I want to see the forced hypocrisy.

They too have the right to not incriminate themselves...

[Berengil]

I mean, this is scummy, but Flynn has the right to do it. He can invoke the 5th to refuse to testify and to refuse to turn over records in his possession, if he has reason to believe that either action would be self-incriminating.

If they want him to talk bad enough, they'll let him have immunity.

[Ripster42]

I mean, this is scummy, but Flynn has the right to do it. He can invoke the 5th to refuse to testify and to refuse to turn over records in his possession, if he has reason to believe that either action would be self-incriminating.

If they want him to talk bad enough, they'll let him have immunity.

I know this isn't the case for court ordered subpoenas, but is this true for congressional subpoenas?

[Berengil]

I know this isn't the case for court ordered subpoenas, but is this true for congressional subpoenas?

I don't know, but if they are asking him to give them something in his possession that would tend to incriminate him, they are in effect asking him to incriminate himself.

[Felya]

Oh, sure. I just want to hear this from the same people who parroted Trump's nonsense about the 5th. I want to see the forced hypocrisy.

I think moving to Politics sub-forums from general has cut down on shit posting by a lot. There was also something about the Trump Reddit going private, which if true would cut down on the copy paste excuses.

Yeah, I think going subforum was a good idea, be it a year too late.

- - - Updated - - -

I know this isn't the case for court ordered subpoenas, but is this true for congressional subpoenas?

What would stop him deleting/altering the evidence in his possession, if he cannot plead the 5th?

[Bullettime]

I don't know, but if they are asking him to give them something in his possession that would tend to incriminate him, they are in effect asking him to incriminate himself.

Actually, he can be forced in this case to provide the documents IF they're known to exist. Not producing them gets you held in contempt of congress.

Being held in contempt requires a committee vote where the GOP have the majority. They can also force him to appear before them to testify but he can just plead the fifth on each individual question which is within his rights but this again requires a committee vote to compel him to appear.

He's trying to stall and make them fight tooth and nail for every document. He's either waiting/hoping for a Trump pardon or he's already struck a deal with the FBI and doesn't want to hurt his case there. If he didn't strike a deal with the FBI, he's basically gambling on a Trump pardon and partisanship on the committee to keep him out of a courtroom.

[Shadowmelded]

In the words of the guy who for some reason is our President - "The mob takes the Fifth Amendment. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?".

If only it was just Trump who said that.

[Bullettime]

Also Manafort and Stone are reported to have handed over their documents. Flynn is holding out and Page has been speculated to already be in the FBI's sphere but is refusing the congressional subpoena like Flynn.

[Ripster42]

What would stop him deleting/altering the evidence in his possession, if he cannot plead the 5th?

Obstruction of justice charges. Deleting/altering info that's under subpoena is black letter obstruction of justice. Federal code states that you can be incarcerated for 5 years or the maximum penalty of the charge you obstructed. In flynn's case, if they try him for treason, that might be death. This is for a court subpoena, I don't know about congressional subpoena, which is why I'm asking.

I don't know, but if they are asking him to give them something in his possession that would tend to incriminate him, they are in effect asking him to incriminate himself.

That literally applies only to verbal testimony, and a court in florida even recently ruled that you have to give up your password to your encryption or face contempt of court charges (which can put you in jail for as long as you refuse to comply).

[Bullettime]

Obstruction of justice charges. Deleting/altering info that's under subpoena is black letter obstruction of justice. Federal code states that you can be incarcerated for 5 years or the maximum penalty of the charge you obstructed. In flynn's case, if they try him for treason, that might be death.



That literally applies only to verbal testimony, and a court in florida even recently ruled that you have to give up your password to your encryption or face contempt of court charges (which can put you in jail for as long as you refuse to comply).

Correct. They can still force Flynn to hand over relevant documents, especially if they're known to already exist. Manafort and Stone have even complied and handed over their copies of the same type of documents requested from Flynn. Flynn is literally playing hardball and hoping the GOP will keep him out of a courtroom or he's trying to work with the FBI already and doesn't want to risk his deal.

Either way, it's not good for Flynn. It's just a matter of waiting for the bureaucratic measures to have time to run their course.

[Ripster42]

Correct. They can still force Flynn to hand over relevant documents, especially if they're known to already exist. Manafort and Stone have even complied and handed over their copies of the same type of documents requested from Flynn. Flynn is literally playing hardball and hoping the GOP will keep him out of a courtroom or he's trying to work with the FBI already and doesn't want to risk his deal.

Either way, it's not good for Flynn. It's just a matter of waiting for the bureaucratic measures to have time to run their course.

Well, I don't know if congressional subpoenas have any real enforcement like court subpoenas do. That's what I'm asking about.

[Bullettime]

Well, I don't know if congressional subpoenas have any real enforcement like court subpoenas do. That's what I'm asking about.

Flynn is effectively already in contempt of congress, could be compelled to appear in court, and would be jailed for 10 days over and over again until he provided the documents they asked for assuming the committee vote passed. Flynn is just hoping the Republicans don't side with that vote.

He has to adhere to the subpoena but it's up to a committee vote in enforcing the ramifications for failing to do so. Republicans just hold the majority which may stonewall it.

[Ripster42]

Flynn is effectively already in contempt of congress, could be compelled to appear in court, and would be jailed for 10 days over and over again until he provided the documents they asked for assuming the committee vote passed. Flynn is just hoping the Republicans don't side with that vote.

He has to adhere to the subpoena but it's up to a committee vote in enforcing the ramifications for failing to do so. Republicans just hold the majority which may stonewall it.

So, reading this, looks like there are a series of votes (committee and then full chamber) that have to go through before he's actually held in contempt of congress, which then leads to contempt of court after congress files in court. So ya, permanent jail until he complies if they get the votes basically.

[PACOX]

This doesn't need to be defended. The only issue here is Trump's comments from the campaign. It looks bad in the public eye, but the point is to not admit guilt. The use of the 5th is completely justified, regardless of how it looks to the public.

Its not going to hold, its just going to make them work harder. All Flynn is doing is dragging out the fight.

[Cthulhu 2020]

If only it was just Trump who said that.

Haha, this is gold, not only did Trump say invoking the fifth probably means you're guilty...

But the man himself who is now taking the fifth said the exact same thing.

Glorious hypocrisy.

- - - Updated - - -

Love how the Trumpkins don't even touch threads like this one, then cry in other threads about how everything being leaked by the FBI and white house itself is "fake news" in other threads.

[Lenonis]

Love how the Trumpkins don't even touch threads like this one, then cry in other threads about how everything being leaked by the FBI and white house itself is "fake news" in other threads.

Give them time. Some threads it's harder to come up with an excuse than others. They'll be here once the official marching orders has been issued from the people who tell them how to think.

[Templar 331]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...g8E?li=BBnb7Kz

President Trump asked two of the nation’s top intelligence officials in March to help him push back against an FBI investigation into possible coordination between his campaign and the Russian government, according to current and former officials.



Trump made separate appeals to the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, urging them to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election.


Coats and Rogers refused to comply with the requests, which they both deemed to be inappropriate, according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private communications with the president.

So could this be seen as impeding an FBI investigation?

[Cthulhu 2020]

Give them time. Some threads it's harder to come up with an excuse than others. They'll be here once the official marching orders has been issued from the people who tell them how to think.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure once Fox has the official excuse as to why this is ok, they'll be in here bleating it like the good little loyal sheep that they are. Until then they have no response. Seems to happen in most threads akin to this one. It's pretty silent til they get their marching orders, as you say.