https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-NOAvxXkAABabq.jpg
When we last checked it with the Enquirer they were throwing Flynn under the bus when it became apparent that more and more was going to come out on Flynn.
Now they are throwing everybody under the bus to promote the idea that all these guys were connected to Russia, and Trump didn't know about it. Let's read that headline several more time. TRUMP DOESN'T KNOW. Are we good? Every one got it? TRUMP DIDN'T KNOW. It was revealed this week that Flynn committed a specific crime. The Enquirer got there first. So I expect more stuff to come out on Stone, Manafort and Page. And remember, Trump doesn't know those guys. Never met them.
And General Flynn who promoted the True Pundit NYPD child trafficking claims and whose son promoted pizzagate is in real trouble.
Flynn on his security review documents didn't reveal that he was paid by Russians and Congressfolk have said this was a clear violation of the law. The White House is refusing to turn over any documents on who checked Flynn out.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/25/politics/trump-flynn-white-house-russia/
We learned two important things on Tuesday in relation to the ongoing investigation into Russian attempts to meddle with the 2016 election:
- Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is in a LOT of trouble.
- The Trump White House declined to provide the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee with documents related to Flynn's application for a security clearance to work at the White House.
Both of those things came to light following a classified meeting of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and press briefing held by Chairman Jason Chaffetz of Utah and ranking Democrat Elijah Cummings of Maryland. That briefing also produced this amazing quote from Chaffetz regarding Flynn: "I see no data to support the notion that Gen. Flynn complied with the law."
view the rest of the comments →
EvaEverywhere ago
I disagree with you 33303. @are_we_sure is one of very few continuous posters here who adds value by bringing up ways to explain away the evidence as anodyne. We all need to do this as well to arm against "debunking" the strongest and best evidence. I am a believer in pizzagate and get called a shill when I provide context for evidence that is picked up here and there. But I don't care since there aren't enough people scrutinizing evidence here. Scrutiny adds value to the evidence. You guys always yelling and itching to use with your brand new pitchfork rather than explore your confirmation bias, are the ones who are NOT providing additional value to the forum.
Are_we_sure ago
Thanks.
I would see it as Plausible, not anondyne though.