(December 21, 2020 at 9:40 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(December 21, 2020 at 9:31 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Um no, Flynn wasn't defending dissent, he was defending blind loyalty.

Flynn would have defended the King if he had been alive during the Revolutionary war.

Where did I say Flynn was defending dissent? And even if he was defending blind loyalty, it STILL isn’t seditious.

If you’re going to disagree with me, try to make sure you’re disagreeing with something I actually said.

Boru

You are spitting hairs here.

Is it legal for a politician to slight, besmirch, smear a rival? YES, that has always happened.

But there is a huge difference between accepted fray, and downright undermining. 

You cannot say that Trump is employing the normal digs both parties throw at each other. Trump demands blind loyalty and that has nothing to do with policy disagreements.

(December 21, 2020 at 9:48 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(December 21, 2020 at 9:40 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Where did I say Flynn was defending dissent? And even if he was defending blind loyalty, it STILL isn’t seditious.

If you’re going to disagree with me, try to make sure you’re disagreeing with something I actually said.

Boru

You are spitting hairs here.

Is it legal for a politician to slight, besmirch, smear a rival? YES, that has always happened.

But there is a huge difference between accepted fray, and downright undermining. 

You cannot say that Trump is employing the normal digs both parties throw at each other. Trump demands blind loyalty and that has nothing to do with policy disagreements.

No, I’m not splitting hairs. You said, ‘Um no, Flynn was not defending dissent’ when I never said or implied that’s what he was doing. You corrected me on something I didn’t say. Neat trick - you must tell me where you buy your tarot cards.

What, exactly, was Flynn undermining? According to the article you linked, he never said that Trump should use the military to overturn the election, he said (probably wrongly) that Trump has that legal authority. 

Sedition is a very specific crime with very serious consequences. You need to be more careful what you accuse people of.

Boru

I will second that I believe Flynn advising Trump to declare marshal law in the battleground states and re-running the elections is sick and seditious.  It's unprecedented and certainly in this case completely without valid basis.  It would have been a significant step toward Cesar (Trump) crossing the Rubicon and effectively ending our Republic.  Flynn has also retweeted right wing organizations calling for Trump to "suspend the Constitution", a power the President does not posses by law.  Yeah, I would say these things are seditious and traitorous.  The last time the US saw anything this bad was Nixon, who said "If the President does it, it's not against the law."