Theory posted on Twitter about what happened with Flynn and Russia, Result: FLYNN FOLLOWS POSTER

I think DOJ can grant immunity, and we've got a new DOJ.

But if it has to do with Russia, Sessions can't be involved because he recused himself. Ugly.

Mmmmmm, rice cakes, this connection meets my approval.

I think DOJ can grant immunity, and we've got a new DOJ.

But if it has to do with Russia, Sessions can't be involved because he recused himself. Ugly.

Yeah I think so, and regardless of Flynn, the investigations are probably more tainted.

Which government facts should we rely on? The single bullet theory? The box cutter theory? The Iraqi WMD theory? The riot-over-a-video-in-Benghazi theory?

Can you....

:SpotTheLiberal:

If this is what happened, this is the reason the FBI hasn't granted immunity for him to tell it.

They are the story!

Keep spinning. How does this explain Flynn's failure to disclose money from RT and Turkey -- in other words he was a foreign agent?

If this is what happened, this is the reason the FBI hasn't granted immunity for him to tell it.

They are the story!

Logic is obviously not your stronger suit.

If Flynn has just implicitly confirmed that twitter poster's theory, that can only mean 1 of 2 things:
a) Flynn's a liar, or
b) Russians were indeed heavily involved in the U.S. presidential election process, spying on the Democratic Party members and sharing their intelligence with (chosen) Republicans (in Trump's camp).

The reason why only these 2 options are possible is because no one shares their intelligence with anybody, unless they're directly involved in the whole process, because sharing any intelligence always carries the risk of revealing your sources and methods.

The FBI must've reached the same conclusion.

Giving Flynn immunity under the option a) would be incredibly stupid. Giving it under the option b) would only be smart if he has any concrete evidence to give to the FBI... which he obviously either doesn't have (a), or is not being squeezed hard enough by the FBI to provide it (b).

It was a smart move by the FBI to deny him immunity and thus put him under greater pressure.

Though... if option b) is the correct one, the most likely outcome of Flynn's bluff will be him suddenly suffering "a tragic accident" of one sort or another... before he gets any chance to spill the beans on the higher-ups (his superiors) in this conspiracy to install Trump.

[link to twitter.com (secure)]

Tweet 1: What happens if @GenFlynn says, "Russians told us we were being spied on. I couldn't reveal they made us aware, due to political strategy."

Tweet 2: .@GenFlynn says, "We discussed what to do about being told that our political opposition was spying on us. Going public would have hurt."

Tweet 3: .@GenFlynn says, "Had we tried to make these claims prior to winning, we might have lost the election and never got access to prove it."

Tweet 4: .@GenFlynn says, "We decided to feed their narrative to see how far they were willing to go with violations. We colored our water."

Tweet 5: .@GenFlynn says, "We also devised a way in which Democrats would think that I was compromised, to see if they would leak protected data."

Tweet 6: .@GenFlynn asks, "you tell me? What were we supposed to do when we have Russians telling us that we're victims of a Watergate break-in?"

Tweet 7: .@GenFlynn says, "Look, we'd have gone to @FBI, but Comey presser about @HillaryClinton, & his deputy, looked politically compromised."

Tweet 8: .@GenFlynn says, "And we'd have been happy to go to DOJ, but @AGLynch was meeting with @BillClinton on tarmacs. They were ones doing it."

Then Flynn follows the poster: Considering the long tweet string I just made, which are obviously just me imagining an argument, I should note this just happened. @GenFlynn Follows you.


Interesting!

Logic is obviously not your stronger suit.

If Flynn has just implicitly confirmed that twitter poster's theory, that can only mean 1 of 2 things:
a) Flynn's a liar, or
b) Russians were indeed heavily involved in the U.S. presidential election process, spying on the Democratic Party members and sharing their intelligence with (chosen) Republicans (in Trump's camp).

The reason why only these 2 options are possible is because no one shares their intelligence with anybody, unless they're directly involved in the whole process, because sharing any intelligence always carries the risk of revealing your sources and methods.

The FBI must've reached the same conclusion.

Giving Flynn immunity under the option a) would be incredibly stupid. Giving it under the option b) would only be smart if he has any concrete evidence to give to the FBI... which he obviously either doesn't have (a), or is not being squeezed hard enough by the FBI to provide it (b).

It was a smart move by the FBI to deny him immunity and thus put him under greater pressure.

Though... if option b) is the correct one, the most likely outcome of Flynn's bluff will be him suddenly suffering "a tragic accident" of one sort or another... before he gets any chance to spill the beans on the higher-ups (his superiors) in this conspiracy to install Trump.

[link to twitter.com (secure)]

Tweet 1: What happens if @GenFlynn says, "Russians told us we were being spied on. I couldn't reveal they made us aware, due to political strategy."

Tweet 2: .@GenFlynn says, "We discussed what to do about being told that our political opposition was spying on us. Going public would have hurt."

Tweet 3: .@GenFlynn says, "Had we tried to make these claims prior to winning, we might have lost the election and never got access to prove it."

Tweet 4: .@GenFlynn says, "We decided to feed their narrative to see how far they were willing to go with violations. We colored our water."

Tweet 5: .@GenFlynn says, "We also devised a way in which Democrats would think that I was compromised, to see if they would leak protected data."

Tweet 6: .@GenFlynn asks, "you tell me? What were we supposed to do when we have Russians telling us that we're victims of a Watergate break-in?"

Tweet 7: .@GenFlynn says, "Look, we'd have gone to @FBI, but Comey presser about @HillaryClinton, & his deputy, looked politically compromised."

Tweet 8: .@GenFlynn says, "And we'd have been happy to go to DOJ, but @AGLynch was meeting with @BillClinton on tarmacs. They were ones doing it."

Then Flynn follows the poster: Considering the long tweet string I just made, which are obviously just me imagining an argument, I should note this just happened. @GenFlynn Follows you.


Interesting!

Can you....

:SpotTheLiberal:

I gave the FBI everything they needed to know 911 was an inside job less than a year after the event. They did NOTHING with it.

This is how I've known for 15 years that this organization has been totally corrupted by the REAL EVIL DOERS (including the high-level pedos.)

Logic is obviously not your stronger suit.

If Flynn has just implicitly confirmed that twitter poster's theory, that can only mean 1 of 2 things:
a) Flynn's a liar, or
b) Russians were indeed heavily involved in the U.S. presidential election process, spying on the Democratic Party members and sharing their intelligence with (chosen) Republicans (in Trump's camp).

The reason why only these 2 options are possible is because no one shares their intelligence with anybody, unless they're directly involved in the whole process, because sharing any intelligence always carries the risk of revealing your sources and methods.

The FBI must've reached the same conclusion.

Giving Flynn immunity under the option a) would be incredibly stupid. Giving it under the option b) would only be smart if he has any concrete evidence to give to the FBI... which he obviously either doesn't have (a), or is not being squeezed hard enough by the FBI to provide it (b).

It was a smart move by the FBI to deny him immunity and thus put him under greater pressure.

Though... if option b) is the correct one, the most likely outcome of Flynn's bluff will be him suddenly suffering "a tragic accident" of one sort or another... before he gets any chance to spill the beans on the higher-ups (his superiors) in this conspiracy to install Trump.

[link to twitter.com (secure)]

Tweet 1: What happens if @GenFlynn says, "Russians told us we were being spied on. I couldn't reveal they made us aware, due to political strategy."

Tweet 2: .@GenFlynn says, "We discussed what to do about being told that our political opposition was spying on us. Going public would have hurt."

Tweet 3: .@GenFlynn says, "Had we tried to make these claims prior to winning, we might have lost the election and never got access to prove it."

Tweet 4: .@GenFlynn says, "We decided to feed their narrative to see how far they were willing to go with violations. We colored our water."

Tweet 5: .@GenFlynn says, "We also devised a way in which Democrats would think that I was compromised, to see if they would leak protected data."

Tweet 6: .@GenFlynn asks, "you tell me? What were we supposed to do when we have Russians telling us that we're victims of a Watergate break-in?"

Tweet 7: .@GenFlynn says, "Look, we'd have gone to @FBI, but Comey presser about @HillaryClinton, & his deputy, looked politically compromised."

Tweet 8: .@GenFlynn says, "And we'd have been happy to go to DOJ, but @AGLynch was meeting with @BillClinton on tarmacs. They were ones doing it."

Then Flynn follows the poster: Considering the long tweet string I just made, which are obviously just me imagining an argument, I should note this just happened. @GenFlynn Follows you.


Interesting!