It seems there are rather a lot who can’t recognize a “baseless speculation” given some of the attacks on Hillary Clinton.

Fox News is accepting the ridiculous contention that Trump’s lawyer wrote the latest tweet in which he sticks his foot in his mouth re Flynn lying. Apart from the legal reasons Ann German (attorney) gave above, I would say this: no lawyer would use the phrase “plead guilty.” A lawyer would always use correct English in that situation and say “pleaded guilty.” It’s clearly a Trump tweet imo.

To the contrary, multiple investigations have found plenty that both Clintons could reasonably be charged with. Unfortunately, the burden of proof is not reasonableness, but beyond a reasonable doubt (in the opinion of 12 Democrat-leaning jurors randomly selected from a jurisdiction that went 91% for Clinton in 2016).

Anybody who’s ever read or watched a police procedural understands what it means to turn state’s evidence. They also understand that anybody who already has admitted lying is an impeachable witness. And most people who’ve been around the block a time or two can recognize baseless speculation when they hear it.

They’re represented major Russian figures with dodgy resumes. I don’t know about the FBI part.

Haven’t at least some of Trump’s lawyers already represented Russians in cases brought by the FBI?

I want to know how Trump manages to get so many people into one of two conditions:

1. Either he has them so overwhelmed they cannot see him as anything other than perfect.

2. They are prepared to lie and even commit perjury for him. They’ll also take the fall for him, like a gang leader.

I often wonder if some of the professional people like lawyers are ones he has something on in the same way it appears the Russians may have Kompromat on him. Otherwise why would they compromise themselves ethically to protect him. We know he’s a bully and throws tantrums, but lawyers etc should be able to stand up to that.

sorry for the italic fail. 🙁

Most people don’t need cable news to explain to them that somebody cops a plea to protect themselves from worse by giving evidence of another, presumably more serious offense.

As Heather’s analysis reveals, FOX viewers (the declining millions are probably 99% Trump [republican] supporters) don’t watch any other news channels/shows. It’s not a lapse of logic, FOX isn’t a news show; it’s a propaganda channel. I will add that FOX viewers probably don’t read much outside a strange propaganda bubble either; I have many family emails and facebook posts to prove this btw. So, when I read your “most people don’t need cable news” to know what the hell is going on in regards to Flynn’s plea deal; you are giving your tribe A MIRACLE in sudden logical, intelligent and knowledgeable thought processes. But miracles don’t exist and your tribe is hopelessly indoctrinated into a fugue of hate and ignorance. What I opine to be true is if FOX doesn’t define a plea deal, their many viewers don’t know what it is. Ergo, they don’t know how serious Flynn’s plea is and the implications thereof. The force that is Mueller only needs one felony account of perjury to hold a very large carrot. As the many cartoons imply, Flynn is the Titanic’s iceberg. You think your republican peers (esp. the seniors…don’t know if they’re peers) understand this impending massive collision? They don’t; FOX won’t allow the truth to be told to its fragile millions. Confirmation-bias obfuscates icebergs and other deadly impediments. A little advice to all people, most importantly the religious, read up on the Dunn and Kruger effect. Let’s save this sinking Democracy.

A comment like this makes me wonder whether you actually read what Heather writes. And if you do read what she writes, this sort of comment is inexcusable.

This is fascinating. You make some tantalizing suppositions that I haven’t seen anywhere else. Sure hope that somebody with some power and sense of responsibility and justice will explore this, and, if warranted, nail that stupid sucka.