- This topic has 53 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Joseph, for a Jew wouldn’t the relevant commandment be Midvar Sheker Tirchok?
Reb. N0M:. It was Mr. Hall that framed it to hold politics to the Light of Torah, not I. I merely responded to his framework.
Milhouse: The Gemara in Shevuos derives a number of halachas from the Possuk of Midvar Sheker Tirchak but all of them are exclusive to the courtroom. The be posuk is contextually surrounded by pesukim which are dealing with the workings of a court. The Rasbam, Rambam and Sefer HaChinuch rule this possuk is not as a distinct prohibition but rather applies only in a court.
Though the Yerei’im rules this posuk does apply as an individual Halacha even outside of a courtroom, however he says that the prohibition only applies when it is a lie that can lead to harming or causing damage to another. However, if there is no damage that can result from the lie then it is only a virtue, not a prohibition.
So I am trying to sort this out, maybe some of you can help me.
Flynn has a phone call with the Russian ambassador, Mr. Kislyak.
The call was intercepted, there was a meeting in which the FBI thought that nothing was concerning, yet still decided to pursue the Flynn meeting, we now know that the intent of the FBI was questionable.
The internal FBI notes suggested that Flynn was cooperative, yet they claimed that Flynn has lied. To which Flynn has pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI.
Due to a string of events, Flynn gets a new representation and they request the government’s documents that were used as material to charge Flynn.
Turns out that the documents (302) was never presented, it was altered, this together with some text messages that indicate that the FBI agents almost had to redo the 302 so that it showed what they wanted it to shot.
After requesting more documents, the government produces more material that shows that the FBI actually didn’t have any reason to interview Flynn, that they were satisfied with his responses and there really was never any concern with anything that he did.
so, this is what seems confusing.
a. Flynn was “officially” accused of discussing sanctions with the Russians, apparently, that would not be OK. He denied it at the time, and was labeled a liar due to the fact that the supposedly the FBI caught him lying.
b. Now that we know that Flynn, according to the FBI agent’s own admission did nothing wrong, what was the conversation about?
c. What was the lie the FBI was accusing Flynn of?
d. If Flynn who we now know did nothing wrong to deserve any of this, yet still admitted to something he did not do. What does this mean for the little man like me and you?
What am I missing here?
מדבר שקר תרחק – A rebbi once wrote a recommendation for a talmid and signed it at the bottom of the page, telling him that he is farthering himself from a lie.
2scents.
a. He was NOT “officially accused” of discussing sanctions with the Russians, since there would have been nothing wrong with that. He wasn’t “officially accused” of anything; in fact he had no idea it was even an official meeting. He thought the FBI agents had come to discuss the transition with him. Agav urcha they asked him whether he had spoken with Kislyak, and/or what he had discussed, and according to them he denied the conversation. We don’t know what was actually said, this is only the agents’ report, composed much later.b. See above. The conversation was, eventually, about his phone call, and according to them this is how he described it. Their impression was that he was not intending to deceive them, he simply wasn’t being exact.
c. The lie he was charged with was this conversation. That he had denied discussing sanctions when in fact he had discussed them. Had the conversation been conducted according to protocol, it should first have been cleared with the DOJ, Flynn should have been told he was being questioned and had to tell the truth, he should have had a lawyer, and above all the transcript THEY HAD should have been provided to him to refresh his memory. They did none of this because the whole point of the conversation was to trick him into telling a lie so they could charge him with something.
d. It is literally maasiim bechol yom that people plead guilty to things they never did. It’s a huge scandal.
“ The Flynn case is a textbook example of common prosecutorial abuses. Yet the media quickly adopted the “anyone who pleads guilty must be guilty” mantra. The “proof is in the plea” regardless of false representations, withheld evidence, and conflicting findings in the case”
Written by Jonathan Turly who is not a Trump fan.
Putting politics aside how can one be ok with what the government did to Flynn?
Im shocked by anyone that refuses to look at the misconduct the FBI did in order to screw Flynn, regardless of their political affiliation, they were beyond corrupt.
I guess there is no such thing as “putting politics aside..”.
Dear Two,
The misconduct of the FBI should not surprise anyone. Well, maybe if you have a pre-Vietnam conception of the FBI.Bret Stephens, a New York Times op-ed arch-liberal has a commentary in back of yesterday’s New York Times saying Flynn is innocent and was railroaded by the FBI and courts.
Interesting how political this discussion is. He is a Democrat who was selected by Obama. Campaigned for Trump, And filled his role for less than a month. In what was designated as a poll on his innocence, almost nobody discussed the details of his meetings, or what was he trying to cover.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.