Republican on Senate Intelligence Panel Says Michael Flynn's Lawyers Say He Will Not Honor Subpoena - Polidicks

[url]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-18/ap-newsalert-top-republican-on-senate-intelligence-panel-says-michael-flynn-s-lawyers-say-he-will-not-honor-subpoena[/url] [QUOTE] Washington (AP) -- Top Republican on Senate intelligence panel says Michael Flynn's lawyers say he will not honor subpoena [/QUOTE]

Also Trump contacted him telling him to "stay strong" This just keeps getting better. This rabbit hole keeps going

[QUOTE=Code3Response;52245098]Also Trump contacted him telling him to "stay strong" This just keeps getting better. This rabbit hole keeps going[/QUOTE] Didn't catch this news, got a source?

is this what they meant by trumps government going against the system?

Quite literally lock him up.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;52245098]Also Trump contacted him telling him to "stay strong"[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=purvisdavid1;52245114]Quite literally lock him up.[/QUOTE] Shall we create a brand of "Stay Strong and Lock Him Up" merch yet?

"Top Republican" - who?

I did not know you can go about not following a subpoena, what happens next? Arrest? [editline]18th May 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=DogGunn;52245123]"Top Republican" - who?[/QUOTE] Whomever is the most senior Republican on the intelligence panel, right in the article. Doesn't explicitly say his name, but I'm sure there's a name behind that title (which I cannot be bothered to look up right now).

That's it? That's the entire article? ...what?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;52245124] Whomever is the most senior Republican on the intelligence panel, right in the article. Doesn't explicitly say his name, but I'm sure there's a name behind that title (which I cannot be bothered to look up right now).[/QUOTE] Perhaps AP and Bloomberg should actually have an article instead of posting a 15 word stub just to get in first.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;52245144]Perhaps AP and Bloomberg should actually have an article instead of posting a 15 word stub just to get in first.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Problem;52245130]That's it? That's the entire article? ...what?[/QUOTE] It's not an actual news article, it's a news alert off the website. Think of it as that little black bar with random news flying across the screen of major news networks, but in internet form.

I wonder if this can count as contempt. Whatever makes things easier, go ahead and play this game, Flynnie, try for a full treason conviction, yeah!

[URL="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2005/03/do_you_have_to_testify_before_congress.html"]A brief explainer of what happens if you refuse to comply. It sounds like Flynn is going to be getting a contempt citation, possibly going to jail for a year. [/URL]

[QUOTE=Problem;52245167][URL="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2005/03/do_you_have_to_testify_before_congress.html"]A brief explainer of what happens if you refuse to comply. It sounds like Flynn is going to be getting a contempt citation, possibly going to jail for a year. [/URL][/QUOTE] LOCK HIM UP!

[QUOTE=Bradyns;52245102]Didn't catch this news, got a source?[/QUOTE] I found two sources on it, and it seems to be that on the 25th Flynn said at a dinner with friends that Trump contacted him and told him to stay strong. The sources I found were [url=http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/334053-flynn-says-trump-told-him-to-stay-strong-report]The Hill[/url] and [url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/investigators-circled-flynn-got-message-trump-stay-strong-145442727.html]Yahoo[/url], although the claim seems to have originated with Yahoo. As a result, I wouldn't necessarily trust the validity of this, as Yahoo has "mixed" factual reporting, as does The Hill.

[QUOTE=Kartoffel;52245181]I found two sources on it, and it seems to be that on the 25th Flynn said at a dinner with friends that Trump contacted him and told him to stay strong. The sources I found were [url=http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/334053-flynn-says-trump-told-him-to-stay-strong-report]The Hill[/url] and [url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/investigators-circled-flynn-got-message-trump-stay-strong-145442727.html]Yahoo[/url], although the claim seems to have originated with Yahoo. As a result, I wouldn't necessarily trust the validity of this, as Yahoo has "mixed" factual reporting, as does The Hill.[/QUOTE] It's a Yahoo exclusive right now but a majority of political writers have confirmed it.

[QUOTE=Bradyns;52245102]Didn't catch this news, got a source?[/QUOTE] [url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/investigators-circled-flynn-got-message-trump-stay-strong-145442727.html?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma]here you go[/url]

[QUOTE=Problem;52245167][URL="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2005/03/do_you_have_to_testify_before_congress.html"]A brief explainer of what happens if you refuse to comply. It sounds like Flynn is going to be getting a contempt citation, possibly going to jail for a year. [/URL][/QUOTE] If he is willingly choosing jail for a year as opposed to turning over the subpoenad records, you can be damn sure that whatever is in those records is MUCH more damning.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52245358]If he is willingly choosing jail for a year, you can be damn sure that whatever is in those records is MUCH more damning.[/QUOTE] no, see, his records are just under audit as soon as the audit ends he will give them to the court, pinky promise

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52245358]If he is willingly choosing jail for a year, you can be damn sure that whatever is in those records is MUCH more damning.[/QUOTE] Could that be grounds for a warrent to seize the records anyway? Or is that not how it works? :vs:

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52245358]If he is willingly choosing jail for a year as opposed to turning over the subpoenad records, you can be damn sure that whatever is in those records is MUCH more damning.[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;d9j7kWzdoKs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9j7kWzdoKs[/video]

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52245358]If he is willingly choosing jail for a year as opposed to turning over the subpoenad records, you can be damn sure that whatever is in those records is MUCH more damning.[/QUOTE] Can't they force him to turn over those records in the interest of national security? I'm sure a reasonable judge on the SCOTUS would be willing to take this up if needed.

[video]https://twitter.com/AP/status/865250855687159808[/video]

[QUOTE=-nesto-;52245455][video]https://twitter.com/AP/status/865250855687159808[/video][/QUOTE] Okay, good. Would way rather this guy actually cooperated.

So the chairman had it wrong? What in the world happened?

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52245358]If he is willingly choosing jail for a year as opposed to turning over the subpoenad records, you can be damn sure that whatever is in those records is MUCH more damning.[/QUOTE] Really irrelevant since he's innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It would matter if he were running for public office, in which the public would condemn this as obvious guilt, but outside that I do not see it mattering as "he's even more obviously guilty".

That's a relief. Don't get my wrong, I'd thoroughly enjoy the irony of Flynn getting thrown in prison, but it will be much more productive to the investigation for the those records to get released.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;52245700]Really irrelevant since he's innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It would matter if he were running for public office, in which the public would condemn this as obvious guilt, but outside that I do not see it mattering as "he's even more obviously guilty".[/QUOTE] When you're not under suspicion for treason, that's good. But if you're under suspicion for treason, the courts say "Show us you're not" and you say "Nah" that's pretty damning. But that doesn't even matter since apparently he never said no.

Yeah, I'm glad this isn't true in a way. You don't refuse to hand over information to someone investigating you if the information literally provides no evidence of guilt. Worse than that, I was wondering if the reported refusal meant he may have already destroyed the information and left an incriminating but not evidential hole in his records. But as it turns out, the rumour mill is grinding and things are not that advanced yet.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;52245700]Really irrelevant since he's innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It would matter if he were running for public office, in which the public would condemn this as obvious guilt, but outside that I do not see it mattering as "he's even more obviously guilty".[/QUOTE] True, but like Zonesylvania said, the subpoena affects more than just Flynn and his defense, it's a matter of national security. He shouldn't be allowed to refuse to cooperate just for a year in jail time, at the very least the penalty should be much larger because.. Personally, if I were faced with incriminating myself and the POTUS in potentially treasonous behavior, I'd happily take a year in rich man's prison instead.