Flynn Resigns

[ruby59]

Callie: Let's stop giving into the foolishness. There is no reasoning with the unreasonable.

Or disputing what is right in front of you in your article in black and white.

 

[Calliecake]

Callie: Let's stop giving into the foolishness. There is no reasoning with the unreasonable.

Katharath, Thank you for being the voice of reason for me. I was only trying to make a point that CNN was not the only news source reporting this story, When will I learn to just keep my mouth shut. LOL

 

[katharath]

Callie: Let's stop giving into the foolishness. There is no reasoning with the unreasonable.

Katharath, Thank you for being the voice of reason for me. I was only trying to make a point that CNN was not the only news source reporting this story, When will I learn to just keep my mouth shut. LOL

It is so easy to get caught up in a cycle that goes nowhere. I speak from experience

ETA - and I do appreciate what you ladies were trying to do! Much love from me!!

 

[ruby59]

Callie: Let's stop giving into the foolishness. There is no reasoning with the unreasonable.

Katharath, Thank you for being the voice of reason for me. I was only trying to make a point that CNN was not the only news source reporting this story, When will I learn to just keep my mouth shut. LOL

Or read the article in its entirety that it is all speculation.

 

[smitcompton]

HI,

No, it is not treason, yet. There is a law on the books called the Logan Act, which says private citizens cannot negotiate with foreign Gov'ts. Its an old law and no-one has been prosecuted under it. Jessie Jackson and former Pres Jimmy Carter have done this many times. What is criminal for Flynn is that he lied to the FBI.

I think it will only rise to the level of treason if there was collusion in actions taken by the Russian Govt to help Trump get elected, and/or there was quid pro quo, as in if you do that for me, we will remove sanctions placed by Obama.

Hope that helps, Lovedogs.

Annette

 

[katharath]

Lovedogs - here is a Slate piece that discusses the situation and how an investigation could be brought about. The real issue remains the same, though - that Republicans control everything and don't want to give that up, no matter what.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/02/how_congress_can_pressure_trump_to_appoint_a_special_counsel.html

 

[lovedogs]

Thanks Annette and Kath.

I guess my sticking point is that I hope there's a way for an investigation to be forced on the GOP (even if they don't want one bc they want all the power).

 

[redwood66]

Here is an interesting article on the illegality of the leaking going on and why. There is explanation on the FISA court.

https://lawfareblog.com/michael-flynn-may-want-call-aclu

 

[Calliecake]

Lovedogs - here is a Slate piece that discusses the situation and how an investigation could be brought about. The real issue remains the same, though - that Republicans control everything and don't want to give that up, no matter what.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/02/how_congress_can_pressure_trump_to_appoint_a_special_counsel.html

If the Republican head the investigation would you believe the finding? I'm sorry at this point I don't trust what the GOP has to say. They knew this for weeks and didn't fire Flynn. Thank God for reporters!

 

[ruby59]

Here is an interesting article on the illegality of the leaking going on and why. There is explanation on the FISA court.

https://lawfareblog.com/michael-flynn-may-want-call-aclu

\

Excellent article, Red.

And yes I am more concerned that someone is leaking sensitive information as some type of retaliation that Trump won the Presidency.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Piece from WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-do-smart-people-in-the-white-house-do-stupid-things-because-trump-told-them-to/2017/02/15/bd59e3a2-f3c7-11e6-8d72-263470bf0401_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.df551f43d0ba


Why do smart people in the White House do stupid things? Because Trump tells them to.


President Trump has just set the all-time speed record for scandal — from zero to Watergate in 25 days.

Not yet four weeks into the new administration, Washington has already revived a favorite parlor game based on Howard Baker’s famous question in the Nixon era.

“What did President Trump know, and when did he know it?” asked conservative Max Boot.

“What did President Trump know and when did he know it?” asked liberal Joan Walsh.

The Boston Globe, the Daily Mail, the Chicago Tribune and others asked variations of the same.

It’s a have-you-stopped-beating-your-wife question, because there is no good answer. If Trump only just found out that Michael Flynn spoke to the Russians about sanctions, he’s a dupe. If Trump knew earlier, he’s been hiding something.

But the “What Did He Know?” game in this case may ask the wrong question. The real question is not when Trump found out but whether Flynn, in his contacts with the ambassador, was doing Trump’s bidding, at least implicitly. This would fit a pattern that has already developed in this White House: Trump’s aides do exactly as he orders.

Flynn is no idiot. He spent a good chunk of his career in the intelligence business. He had to know that U.S. spy agencies listen to the Russian ambassador’s phone calls — and he’s savvy enough to know that his discussions with the ambassador about sanctions the Obama administration was imposing that day would make their way up the reporting chain. Finally, he had to know he couldn’t pass it off as a casual contact; the two spoke five times that day.

So why do it? Perhaps for the same reason other smart people who work for Trump have done seemingly unwise things: Trump told them to.

Sean Spicer is a seasoned pro, deeply experienced with the press. So why would he, in his first full day on the job, destroy his credibility by berating reporters in the briefing room and peddling the bogus claim that Trump’s inauguration crowd set a record? An explanation soon emerged: Trump himself had directed Spicer to do it.

Likewise, Kellyanne Conway, an old political hand, had to know she was breaking rules when she gave what she called a “free commercial” last week on Fox News for Ivanka Trump’s fashion line: “Go buy it today, everybody.” A bipartisan smackdown came swiftly and Spicer said she had been “counseled.” Why do it?

Well, consider that the day after Conway’s supposed transgression, she tweeted an Associated Press report saying Trump had defended Conway to White House staffers, saying Spicer’s “counseled” rebuke was “unfair to Conway,” who was “merely sticking up” for Ivanka. On Tuesday, Conway tweeted another message indicating she parrots Trump: “I serve at the pleasure of [Trump]. His message is my message.”

Next came Stephen Miller, the young Trump White House policy adviser who went on four Sunday talk shows and was widely pilloried for uttering extravagant untruths about voter fraud and for his attempt to assign absolute power to Trump. (“The powers of the president to protect our country . . . will not be questioned.”) But when the performance was done, the president made clear Miller had done as Trump wanted, tweeting: “Congratulations Stephen Miller - on representing me this morning on the various Sunday morning shows. Great job!”

In Flynn’s case, if he were freelancing with the Russians, Trump would justifiably be furious about the embarrassment and distraction it has caused. Trump never hesitates to attack those he thinks have wronged him. But the day after Flynn’s calls to the ambassador, Russia made an unusual decision: It would not take the usual course of retaliating against the Obama administration’s sanctions. And Trump tweeted his pleasure: “Great move on delay (by V. Putin) — I always knew he was very smart!”

Since then, Trump has uttered nary a word of criticism of Flynn. On Wednesday, he called Flynn “a wonderful man” who has “been treated very, very unfairly by the media.”

No surprise here: Flynn’s talks with the ambassador, Vladi­mir Putin’s subsequent decision to postpone retaliation, and Trump’s applause for that decision are consistent with Trump’s long-standing words and actions — selling property to the Russians; declining to release tax returns that could indicate whether Russians hold any of his debt; his early musings about Ukraine and NATO that have been more friendly to Moscow; his reluctance to criticize Putin’s human-rights abuses or to acknowledge Russia’s intervention to help him win the election; his surrounding himself with men — Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Roger Stone and Flynn — with ties to Moscow; and, now, confirmation of frequent contact between Russian intelligence and Trump’s campaign.

Asking what Trump knew when, then, misses the more important question: Was Flynn acting under Trump’s instructions?

 

[redwood66]

No. The media is trying to make it a worse than Watergate situation.

 

[ruby59]

No. The media is trying to make it a worse than Watergate situation.

They are now calling it a 9/11 like event. :

And one is calling it a Pearl Harbor scale event.

 

[redwood66]

Since people seem to think NPR is acceptable

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing

 

[Calliecake]

Since people seem to think NPR is acceptable

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing

Red, If there was no wrong doing Flynn would have never resigned and Trump would never have asked him to.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Since people seem to think NPR is acceptable

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing

Red, If there was no wrong doing Flynn would have never resigned and Trump would never have asked him to.

This is the EXACT conversation the CB just had 10 seconds ago! If there was nothing bad/incriminating/insert-other-appropriate-words-here then with nothing to hide Flynn would still be in his role.

 

[Calliecake]

Since people seem to think NPR is acceptable

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing

Red, If there was no wrong doing Flynn would have never resigned and Trump would never have asked him to.

This is the EXACT conversation the CB just had 10 seconds ago! If there was nothing bad/incriminating/insert-other-appropriate-words-here then with nothing to hide Flynn would still be in his role.

Exactly. When you factor in Trumps ego, he would never have allowed this to happen. He never once admitted he made a mistake or said he was sorry for anything during his campaign. Asking for Flynn's resignation was admitting it was a bad decision to hire him for the job in the first place.

 

[redwood66]

Flynn was asked to resign because he was not truthful with Pence. Someone's first inclination to lie is not who they want in that job and I agree with that assessment.

 

[Matata]

From what I've read, it's unlikely he'll be prosecuted under the Logan Act. He can, however, be prosecuted for lying to the FBI. Which begs the question, why did he lie if he allegedly knew convos were routinely recorded and if he allegedly didn't say anything incriminating.

 

[Dee*Jay]

From what I've read, it's unlikely he'll be prosecuted under the Logan Act. He can, however, be prosecuted for lying to the FBI. Which begs the question, why did he lie if he allegedly knew convos were routinely recorded and if he allegedly didn't say anything incriminating.

To quote the article that I posted above... "Why do smart people in the White House do stupid things? Because Trump tells them to."

 

[katharath]

From what I've read, it's unlikely he'll be prosecuted under the Logan Act. He can, however, be prosecuted for lying to the FBI. Which begs the question, why did he lie if he allegedly knew convos were routinely recorded and if he allegedly didn't say anything incriminating.

To quote the article that I posted above... "Why do smart people in the White House do stupid things? Because Trump tells them to."

It would explain everything. Trump is a mess. If he is truly calling the shots, you would get a hot mess - which is what we have.

 

[lovedogs]

Since people seem to think NPR is acceptable

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing

Red, If there was no wrong doing Flynn would have never resigned and Trump would never have asked him to.

This is the EXACT conversation the CB just had 10 seconds ago! If there was nothing bad/incriminating/insert-other-appropriate-words-here then with nothing to hide Flynn would still be in his role.

Exactly. When you factor in Trumps ego, he would never have allowed this to happen. He never once admitted he made a mistake or said he was sorry for anything during his campaign. Asking for Flynn's resignation was admitting it was a bad decision to hire him for the job in the first place.

But don't worry, Chump is already going on a stupidity bender about how this is ALL THE MEDIA'S FAULT! AND THE LEAKER'S FAULT! AND EVERYONE IS SO UNFAIRRRRRR TO POOOOOOORRRRRR FLYNN! WAAAAAHHHHHHHH

 

[Dancing Fire]

From what I've read, it's unlikely he'll be prosecuted under the Logan Act. He can, however, be prosecuted for lying to the FBI. Which begs the question, why did he lie if he allegedly knew convos were routinely recorded and if he allegedly didn't say anything incriminating.

Maybe HRC and Flynn can share the same jail cell!.. which one will get the upper bunk?..