Flynnghazi: Justice Dept. warned WH that advisor vunlnerable to blackmail.

[Surfd]

So his excuse for talking with spies is that he did not know they were spies? No Fucking Shit. If you knew they were Spies, they would be pretty fucking bad at their job now wouldn't they...

[Skroe]

Fareed Zakaria on CNN brings up an interesting / important point.

The day Flynn made his phone call to the Russian Ambassador (after Obama announced sanctions)... it wasn't just one phone call. It was five phone calls.

Five.

That's not kosher at all. That's way, way beyond a "getting to know you". And this is what drew the FBI to Flynn in the first place, according to Zakaria. That after Obama announced sanctions, the Russian state was revving up for retaliatory measures (publicly and privately according to intelligence), and then just after Flynn made his calls, Putin did is "turn the other cheek" thing.

In other words, what the Trumpkns regarded as "brilliant" and "showing Obama", Western Intelligence regarded as fishy as hell.


I would not be surprised in coming weeks, if two things happen.

(1) the transcript leaks out (i.e. it is intentionally leaked, probably by John McCain)

(2) Flynn is arrested by the FBI.

[Milchshake]

Fareed Zakaria on CNN brings up an interesting / important point.

The day Flynn made his phone call to the Russian Ambassador (after Obama announced sanctions)... it wasn't just one phone call. It was five phone calls.

Five.

That's not kosher at all. That's way, way beyond a "getting to know you". And this is what drew the FBI to Flynn in the first place, according to Zakaria. That after Obama announced sanctions, the Russian state was revving up for retaliatory measures (publicly and privately according to intelligence), and then just after Flynn made his calls, Putin did is "turn the other cheek" thing.

In other words, what the Trumpkns regarded as "brilliant" and "showing Obama", Western Intelligence regarded as fishy as hell.


I would not be surprised in coming weeks, if two things happen.

(1) the transcript leaks out (i.e. it is intentionally leaked, probably by John McCain)

(2) Flynn is arrested by the FBI.

Interspersed with how many 3am calls to Trump? Its like Flynn was trying to negotiate a take-out dinner between friends

[thilicen]

It seems inevitable that a transcript / recording will go public one way or the other, probably pretty soon.

[Skroe]

Interspersed with how many 3am calls to Trump? Its like Flynn was trying to negotiate a take-out dinner between friends

Exactly. That's the implication: who was Flynn talking to between talking to the Ambassador.

Was it Bannon? Was it Trump himself?

The best part is, this isn't some side inquiry. This is the KEY question that lead the FBI and NSA down this path (again, according to Zakaria). They want to know why Flynn was talking to when he got off the phone with the Russian Ambassador (since they know what he said to him). Because the FBI confronted Flynna bout this in early july, and they think he lied to them, which is what led directly to this whole resignation saga.

Who here wants to take a bet that Flynn has already lawyer-ed up? I bet he gets charged with lying to investigators at the very least. The bar for the "T-word" is so high though (intentionally so). Espionage maybe?

[Draco-Onis]

It seems inevitable that a transcript / recording will go public one way or the other, probably pretty soon.

That seems to be the only option to force republicans to press the issue most are trying to run away and say that the matter is closed now that Flynn has resigned.

[Poopymonster]

https://oversight.house.gov/contact/

Oversight website turned off their phones and disabled their email link. Chaffetz you fucking coward.

Order him a pizza, delivered, you pay for it, under Special Directions when ordering it online, "Please attach paper with the following" with your message. I believe someone did that to Orin Hatch recently.

- - - Updated - - -

I try not too. When I do blood starts seeping out of my eyes, nose, and ears.

Give it a few weeks, that'll be a preexisting condition and your insurance won't cover it.

- - - Updated - - -

It's going exactly as I expected it. Republicans leak all of the inner workings of anyone who was loyal to Trump, the left raises the leaks as a controversy. Both sides wait to try and take out the chosen candidate of not half of the people, to take back their power. Because the real threat to Republicans is not the Democrats, and the real threat to Democrats is not the Republicans. The real threat is neither.

FTFY.

/10tinyfingersontinyhands

- - - Updated - - -

I got through to their automated line, at least. Didn't get past the first prompt since I can't sit on the phone right now.



This...can't be real...please say this isn't real...

Would the name of the app be Нам доверяют,'s удалена! by chance?

- - - Updated - - -

I think we will be better off as Americans with Pence in charge, instead of Bannon and Trump.

Pence will be better than Trump. If only by "You only have to eat half the shit sandwich instead of all of it" manner of better.

[Breccia]

It seems inevitable that a transcript / recording will go public one way or the other, probably pretty soon.

Could be. If I had the transcripts, I would wait for what seemed like the time to cause the most damage possible. But I doubt a newspaper or media outlet would do that, under fear of being scooped. And someone leaking the information might want to do it while they still have their position, rather than risk being caught and fired and therefore discredited.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/o...ft-region&_r=0

The Missing Pieces in the Flynn Story

President Trump may have thought the departure of his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, would end the controversy over his administration’s involvement with Russia, but the damning revelations keep coming. The whole fiasco underscores the dysfunction and dishonesty of his White House and how ill prepared it is to protect the nation.

It’s unlikely that Mr. Flynn would have been pushed out absent a revelation on Monday by The Washington Post: that the Justice Department told the White House in January that Mr. Flynn had misled senior officials about a phone call with the Russian ambassador. Justice told the White House that, contrary to his claims, Mr. Flynn had discussed American sanctions against Russia with the ambassador. The discrepancy between what Mr. Flynn had said publicly and what the Russians (and American intelligence officials) knew made Mr. Flynn vulnerable to Russian blackmail. But the White House evidently didn’t feel the need to act on that danger as long as it was concealed from the public.

On Tuesday, the White House admitted that Mr. Trump was told more than two weeks ago about Mr. Flynn’s deception, even though the president told reporters on Friday that he was unaware of a news report to that effect. Mr. Flynn, a hothead and an ideologue, was not fit to be national security adviser in the first place. That Mr. Trump clung to such a compromised person in such a sensitive position is at best an abysmal failure of judgment. As late as Monday, Mr. Flynn was in security briefings and had access to the president.

In his resignation letter, Mr. Flynn said he had given senior officials “incomplete information” about the phone call. F.B.I. agents interviewed Mr. Flynn days after the inauguration on that same subject, The Times reported on Tuesday. That means he could be exposed to a felony charge if he lied to them as well. The Times also reported Tuesday that current and former American officials said other Trump associates and campaign officials had had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.

Mr. Flynn and Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, had been in touch during the campaign and after President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Russia on Dec. 29 for hacking the Democrats’ campaign computers, allegedly to benefit Mr. Trump in the election, according to intelligence reports and official sources cited by The Post. Mr. Kislyak’s communications had been monitored by the F.B.I., revealing his contacts with Mr. Flynn.

Sally Yates, the acting attorney general, judged an intercepted call “highly significant” and “potentially illegal” under the Logan Act, which bars private citizens from interfering in diplomatic disputes with other countries. When word of the Flynn-Kislyak call leaked on Jan. 12, a Trump official denied that sanctions were discussed. The White House spokesman, Sean Spicer, gave a similar answer on Jan. 13, as did Vice President Mike Pence on Jan. 15. After Mr. Trump’s inauguration, Mr. Spicer said on Jan. 23 that Mr. Flynn again assured him that sanctions had not been discussed. Shortly afterward, Ms. Yates, with agreement from James Comey, the F.B.I. director, informed Donald McGahn, the White House counsel, about what really happened.

There are many unanswered questions. Did anyone in the White House authorize Mr. Flynn’s contacts? Why has Mr. Trump not condemned him for discussing sanctions with the Russians when he was not yet in office?

All of this puts more pressure on Congress to act. Although some top Republican senators have pledged to deepen their investigation of Russian involvement in the election, the party’s response over all has been irresponsible. “I think that situation has taken care of itself,” Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said on Tuesday about Mr. Flynn. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, was equally dismissive: “It just seems like there’s a lot of nothing there.” Then there was Senator Rand Paul, who put partisanship ahead of national security by declaring “it makes no sense” for Republicans to investigate Republicans.

Of course, Republicans pilloried Hillary Clinton for nearly two years for using a private email server, a bad decision, but one that didn’t endanger the nation. And they conducted eight futile investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s role as secretary of state during the 2012 Benghazi attack.

Now the same Republicans seem intent on helping Mr. Trump hide the truth by refusing to investigate Russia’s hacking and other attempts to influence the 2016 election, as well as Mr. Trump’s connections to Russia and affinity for President Vladimir Putin.

Mr. Trump has no more urgent task now than putting in place an experienced national security adviser who is beyond reproach. With the world in turmoil, his three-week-old administration is consumed by a self-inflicted crisis, marked by a pattern of recurrent lying and incompetence, and perhaps worse.

[Deleted]

... who was Flynn talking to between talking to the Ambassador.... This is the KEY question that lead the FBI and NSA down this path

To a non-US observer, it looks odd that the NSA was/is investigating their own boss. The FBI, who arguably put Trump in power, also seems questionable as a "guardian of the guardians".

It's a fascinating constitutional study. Presumably, as Trump tightens his grip on the offices of state, replacing the Obama remnants with stooges, it will become harder and harder to hold him to account. The acting AG who reported concerns over Flynn to the White House already sacked. Trump is now focusing his ire (well, tweets) on the intelligence community who leak news of the wrong-doing, rather than the wrong-doing itself. Couple that with Trump's attempts to discredit the media and you wonder what checks and balances there will be in 4 years time.

I under-estimated the threat Trump poses to the US. Before the election, I thought he was just an odious narcissistic blowhard. But he's actually much worse. He's a bona fide threat to democracy.

[Noxx79]

To a non-US observer, it looks odd that the NSA was/is investigating their own boss. The FBI, who arguably put Trump in power, also seems questionable as a "guardian of the guardians".

It's a fascinating constitutional study. Presumably, as Trump tightens his grip on the offices of state, replacing the Obama remnants with stooges, it will become harder and harder to hold him to account. The acting AG who reported concerns over Flynn to the White House already sacked. Trump is now focusing his ire (well, tweets) on the intelligence community who leak news of the wrong-doing, rather than the wrong-doing itself. Couple that with Trump's attempts to discredit the media and you wonder what checks and balances there will be in 4 years time.

I under-estimated the threat Trump poses to the US. Before the election, I thought he was just an odious narcissistic blowhard. But he's actually much worse. He's a bona fide threat to democracy.

Trump simply shouldn't have pissed off the spooks.
Yet another controversy he could have avoided if he kept his damn mouth shut and his ego in check. I look forward to more.

[Breccia]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/politi...ons/index.html

Senate Majority Leader, yes a GOP member,is calling for a more detailed investigation into Flynn, if nothing else, as part of the ongoing investigation into the Russian hacking in the first place.

[Ahovv]

Yeah, these forums are lost. You guys won't be satisfied until we're involved in World War III. I'm out.

[TheCount]

Trump blamed the media for Flynn's forced resignation. Does that surprise anyone?

[Breccia]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-an...elling-habits/

Trump and Flynn and truth-telling habits

Sunday, on “Face the Nation” White House policy adviser Stephen Miller assessed the administration’s ability to handle the frantic pace: “to say that we’re in control would be a substantial understatement.” Today, National Security adviser Michael Flynn resigned. Sunday, a friend of the president, Newsmax editor Chris Ruddy who had just shared a late night drink at the White House, went on CNN’s Reliable Sources and said Chief of Staff Reince Priebus was in over his head. Administration-friendly Breitbart reported Tuesday that a list of possible replacements for Priebus is being evaluated as a part of a staff shake-up. The reports of such a shakeup and of general chaos are not just appearing in administration-allied organs, but also here, here, here, here, here and here.

[EDITOR'S NOTE: And here]

Miller’s assertion of total competency came the morning after the president and his national security team appeared to hold a patio security session tableside at a Mar-a-Lago to assess how to respond to a North Korean missile launch. A few days earlier, an appeals court had upended the president’s plans by putting a hold on his immigration executive order.

Something is definitely being substantially understated.

Michael Flynn was forced to resign, we are told, because he told a big lie. But what about the little ones? Monday, Kellyanne Conway offered an echo of Miller’s certainty when asked about the controversy swirling around Flynn. The president had “full confidence” in his national security adviser, she said. A day later, Sean Spicer contradicted her and said that Flynn was fired because of a long growing erosion of trust. These two things cannot be true. A president cannot grow a long-term lack of trust in someone with whom they had full confidence the day before. Still, both statements were uttered with the force of truth and on behalf of the Presidency. (The term “full confidence” now has an unstable meaning; A source told Ruddy the president has “full confidence” in Priebus.)

The stark differences between these two statements would be concerning enough, but Conway’s appearance on MSNBC highlights the way in which the disconnect hurts White House credibility. Monday, in defending the president’s “full confidence,” Conway detailed Flynn’s central role in national security meetings and interactions with foreign leaders. He was the tent pole at the center of things. Each example she cited was another brick in the monument to Trump’s confidence. But now that we learn that the president had growing trust concerns about Flynn, the evidence from Conway’s defense becomes damning embroidery. If the president didn’t trust his national security adviser, as Spicer claims, why was Flynn in the middle of the many crucial decisions Conway outlined?

If Michael Flynn lost his job because of a gradual erosion of trust, shouldn’t the easy and frequent production of official statements that are so many connecting flights from the truth also be concerning?

What is the appetite for truth in the Trump White House? That’s not a question about the untrue things the president says. It’s about the level of truth the system expects. That is, after all, the standard by which we are told Flynn was ultimately judged. He didn’t meet that standard and was pushed out. Accepting that standard (and not entertaining the idea that the real problem was not Flynn’s lie, but that he was caught lying), what are the incentives for honesty in the Trump White House? Are people drawn to their most honest selves? Or, do the incentives encourage people to say things that aren’t so? Or, are people encouraged to compete by seeing who can really go over the top?

Usually a White House staff struggles with a boss who hates to hear uncomfortable news. The structure of the office and power make it hard to be honest. Instead, here, everyone pumps each other up, particularly when the staff feels under siege. Every day is the Battle of Agincourt and no one wants to raise their hand and say hey we’re outnumbered.

This White House adds a new twist. The boss encourages showy public acts of misinformation. The claims of certainty are gaudy enough to be seen by the audience all the way in the last seat of the theater. The president is clearly in the back row watching. After Miller’s Sunday show appearances in which he expressed metaphysical certainty about unsubstantiated voter fraud claims, President Trump praised him on Twitter.

Performance fealty creates an incentive structure which fools the public and encourages dissembling. It also worries allies. A number of Republican congressional staffers and lawmakers I have talked to worry that the White House isn’t evaluating its problems clearly and that President Trump’s management structure encourages the staff to behave like everything is awesome. The sense of frustration and unpredictability in these conversations is palpable.

Donald Trump came from the corporate world. In many corporations the penalty for lying to the boss or senior executives in a way that makes them look bad is swift dismissal. That isn’t the case in the Trump White House. The president restrained himself for weeks after learning Flynn didn’t tell the truth. Vice President Pence, the injured party, wasn’t informed for more than a week after the news of Flynn’s misinformation was delivered to the White House by the Department of Justice. Press secretary Spicer said it was to give Flynn “due process.” Another administration source explained it was for the lawyers to check out whether Flynn had broken any laws. Donald Trump’s fame was built in part on a reputation for quick firings, but sometimes reality is different than the reality show.

[cubby]

It's an absolute shit-show - just like everyone knew it would be. Probably worse, actually.

I think Flynn has the record for shortest tenure.

[alexw]

To a non-US observer, it looks odd that the NSA was/is investigating their own boss. The FBI, who arguably put Trump in power, also seems questionable as a "guardian of the guardians".

It's a fascinating constitutional study. Presumably, as Trump tightens his grip on the offices of state, replacing the Obama remnants with stooges, it will become harder and harder to hold him to account. The acting AG who reported concerns over Flynn to the White House already sacked. Trump is now focusing his ire (well, tweets) on the intelligence community who leak news of the wrong-doing, rather than the wrong-doing itself. Couple that with Trump's attempts to discredit the media and you wonder what checks and balances there will be in 4 years time.

I under-estimated the threat Trump poses to the US. Before the election, I thought he was just an odious narcissistic blowhard. But he's actually much worse. He's a bona fide threat to democracy.

Trump can't replace the intelligence community operatives. Only the top few people are nominated by the president. That means there are going to be multiple layers of people who he can't take out, and who owe their loyalty to the country and institutions of government rather than to the republican party and Trump.

If the republicans and/or Trump attempt to bury this investigation the intelligence community will do what it is currently doing - leak the info. Its no accident that the information that is coming out is coming out now. The IC informed Trump about their concerns regarding Flynn. Trump sat on the information in an attempt to bury it. The result - the IC got sick of seeing no action on Flynn so members of those services leaked whatever was needed to take him down. The same will be true of whatever else they find. If Trump/republicans attempt to squash any investigation they'll "deep throat" every last bit of whatever they already have, even stuff not on Trump, and you can be sure it'll be done in the most damaging way possible. It's simply too late for republicans/Trump to kill any investigation now. They can slow it down, and probably will try, but they can't stop it. Its too late for that.

[Espe]

Trump blamed the media for Flynn's forced resignation. Does that surprise anyone?

I like how he threw yet another little tantrum and promised to "plug the leaks" instead of solving the actual problems that they have brought to light.

He may be a dangerous, narcissistic child but I'll give him this: he was a great candidate for Republicans and he perfectly embodies their right-wing "ethics" and "morality."

[Breccia]

I think Flynn has the record for shortest tenure.

It is proven he has the shortest tenure for that position, which is only a few generations old.

I did look for the shortest tenure in a more general situation, but couldn't find a decisive answer. I mean, Agnew lasted half a year, and that's short. 24 days? That's gotta be tough to beat, regardless.

[Edge-]

I'm honestly worried about Trumps people publicly trying to cut Priebus's legs out from under him.

He's the Collaborators only remaining direct link to Trump. If he goes, I think the Collaborators will quickly be finding themselves joining the Resistance.

[alexw]

Exactly. That's the implication: who was Flynn talking to between talking to the Ambassador.

Was it Bannon? Was it Trump himself?

The best part is, this isn't some side inquiry. This is the KEY question that lead the FBI and NSA down this path (again, according to Zakaria). They want to know why Flynn was talking to when he got off the phone with the Russian Ambassador (since they know what he said to him). Because the FBI confronted Flynna bout this in early july, and they think he lied to them, which is what led directly to this whole resignation saga.

Who here wants to take a bet that Flynn has already lawyer-ed up? I bet he gets charged with lying to investigators at the very least. The bar for the "T-word" is so high though (intentionally so). Espionage maybe?

Lat night you made a post asking for Europe's spooks to chime in..... well it looks like they already are.......

We are now in the unprecedented situation of having Europe spying on the US president.

http://www.newsweek.com/allies-inter...cations-557283

U.S. Allies Conduct Intelligence Operation Against Trump Staff and Associates, Intercepted Communications


As part of intelligence operations being conducted against the United States for the last seven months, at least one Western European ally intercepted a series of communications before the inauguration between advisers associated with President Donald Trump and Russian government officials, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.

The sources said the interceptions include at least one contact between former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and a Russian official based in the United States. It could not be confirmed whether this involved the telephone call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak that has led to Flynn’s resignation, or additional communications. The sources said the intercepted communications are not just limited to telephone calls: The foreign agency is also gathering electronic and human source information on Trump’s overseas business partners, at least some of whom the intelligence services now consider to be agents of their respective governments. These operations are being conducted out of concerns that Russia is seeking to manipulate its relationships with Trump administration officials as part of a long-term plan to destabilize the NATO alliance.

Moreover, a Baltic nation is gathering intelligence on officials in the Trump White House and executives with the president’s company, the Trump Organization, out of concern that an American policy shift toward Russia could endanger its sovereignty, according to a third person with direct ties to that nation’s government.

These sources spoke on condition that they not be identified because they were not formally authorized to disclose the information. While Newsweek was told which allied nations intercepted the communications and are gathering intelligence on Trump associates, the sources did so on condition that the countries not be identified out of concern those governments would incur the president’s wrath.

The Western European intelligence operations began in August, after the British government obtained information that people acting on behalf of Russia were in contact with members of the Trump campaign. Those details from the British were widely shared among the NATO allies in Europe. The Baltic nation has been gathering intelligence for at least that long, and has conducted surveillance of executives from the Trump Organization who were traveling in Europe.

These operations reflect a serious breakdown in the long-standing faith in the direction of American policy by some of the country’s most important allies. Worse, the United States is now in a situation that may be unprecedented—where European governments know more about what is going on in the executive branch than any elected American official. To date, the Republican-controlled Congress has declined to conduct hearings to investigate the links between Trump’s overseas business partners and foreign governments, or the activities between Russia and officials in the Trump campaign and administration—the very areas being examined by the intelligence services of at least two American allies.

The information gathered by the Western European government has been widely shared among the NATO allies, although it is not clear how much has been provided to American intelligence officials. One source said that members of British Prime Minister Theresa May’s staff had been briefed on the surveillance findings prior to her meeting last month with Trump and that officials within the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel have also obtained the details.

What are the odds its our closest ally the Brits?