This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

National security adviser Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador, despite denials, officials say

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 3]

Here's the part that Maddow pointed out as being most significant as it raises the question of members of the Trump campaign communicating with Russians BEFORE the election. What kind of information were they exchanging? How much tampering with the election went on? The House Intelligence Committee will be looking into this.

The talks were part of a series of contacts between Flynn and Kislyak that began before the Nov. 8 election and continued during the transition, officials said. In a recent interview, Kislyak confirmed that he had communicated with Flynn by text message, by phone and in person, but declined to say whether they had discussed sanctions.

View user profile
Floridatexan wrote:
Here's an analysis by David Corn:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/02/flynn-trump-washington-post-russia


Love David Corn! I especially found this interesting. I had not known or had forgotten Flynn's previous post. E-gads, not too bright!

Which brings us to the not-very-smart part of this story. How do all these officials know what was really said between Flynn and the Russian? US intelligence routinely conducts surveillance aimed at Russian diplomats and monitors their communications. The Post story clearly indicates that Flynn's conversation with Kislyak was intercepted and that a transcript of it has been passed throughout the intelligence community. Flynn, of course, should have been aware that any discussion he had with the Russian ambassador was vulnerable to surveillance. After all, not too long ago he was head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

This is a scandal. A big scandal. Republicans and Democrats should be screaming for investigations and public hearings.
This makes Flynn's behavior dumb on two counts. First, he should not have explicitly discussed undermining US policy with Kislyak, because he ought to have realized this conversation would be picked up by US intelligence. Second, he should not have told Pence and others that sanctions had not been covered in the conversation, because he should have known there was evidence of what had actually transpired during his chat.

View user profile
“The problem with Mike Flynn right now, I see it in three ways, either he’s had an extreme case of the dumb ass, he thinks he was above the law, or there was an integrity violation,” Ret. Army General Mark Hertling


http://www.rawstory.com/2017/02/maybe-he-had-a-case-of-the-dumbas-ret-army-gen-slams-flynn-for-thinking-hes-above-the-law/

View user profile
And if it can further be demonstrated that Flynn and/or other members of Trump's campaign actually conspired with the Russians to influence our election, Katy bar the door. Wouldn't that be something and a half? I'm feeling more optimistic now than I have since election night, while trying not to get my hopes up too, too high.
The main fly in the ointment is a concern over why Flynn apparently didn't realize or remember the conversations would be surveilled.

View user profile
I guess I do not see the problem without seeing the transcript. This is why I quit watching Maddow. She is entirely out of touch with reality. People are not going to vote for democrats or an alternative without constructive policies and legislation which helps people. She makes her money by trying to make a big bruha about how stupid people are and that people are doing something wrong. She reminds me of that little girl in fifth grade who would raise her hand and tell the teacher that billie missed the trash can and threw a piece of paper on the floor. All true, but who gives a chit. She and Lawrence have an arrogance of we know better, but if they knew better they would not have missed where the American people were at......wanting jobs......wanting protections from unfair trade......you see that would have required something constructive, and not the gotcha type of journalism which honestly I bought into lock stock and barrel until I realized it was counterproductive and actually was helping the insanity of the President Trump media train. I have not watched one minute of Fox or MSNBC since the election. I only watch CNN once in awhile......I give no credence to talking heads and I am trying to read print journalist more, and in this process I honestly feel liberated and much more the free thinker than when I was hypnotized that Billie throwing the paper on the floor and not in the waste basket was relevant....it was not.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:I guess I do not see the problem without seeing the transcript.  

Really??

Flynn explicitly talked about the sanctions that Obama levied on Russia as retaliation for their cyber-hacking during the campaign.

The message - don't worry about it, we've got your back.

And, then he lied repeatedly about having done so.

Can you see it now?

View user profile
President Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space."

President Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…"

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

View user profile
There are two different things going on here with Flynn re his communications with Russians. The most recent events took place between the election and the inauguration and involved Flynn telling the Russians not to worry about the sanctions Obama put on Russia as punishment for their involvement in our election. The problem here is the timing of the talks. Trump was not in power. Flynn was going behind the back of the sitting president and dealing directly with a foreign power.

The other part of this story is more of a concern to me than the sanctions lifting part, as jaw dropping as that in itself remains. This is the discovery that Flynn was communicating with the Russians During the Campaign. They were somehow working together to win the WH for Trump.

Now that certain parts of the infamous 35 page Russian dossier on Trump have been verified it makes people wonder what they have on Trump. Makes us wonder why Trump buddies up with Putin so cozily. It makes us wonder why he never criticizes  Putin in any real way. What is going on? How much damage has this relationship caused our country?

View user profile
I do not see a problem here. None. Nothing which has been presented is even close to a problem. Legally or ethically. A new administration reaching out with policy parameters to a foreign nation is not treason or even illegal. It is simply a conversation. The idea of the campaign working in conjunction with the Russians needs to have hard proof for me even to raise an eyebrow. All I hear is innuendo and a tempest in a teapot. That is exactly what got President Trump elected. Now, If you have a transcript where Flynn is doing a quid pro quo which was harmful to the American people, or a transcript showing money or influence being traded to betray America, I am all in with roasting the bastards, but nope.......this is just Maddow attempting to create a storm of media attention to profit and raise her ratings.......sorry, Fox and MSNBC make money from noise. I would like to see facts and transcripts and statute which has been violated. I see absolutely nothing in this absent proof. Innuendo is not proof. It is a great lead story for people piszed with the election of President Trump to tune in, and it is not like we did not see Fox leverage that anger for more profits after President Obama was elected. Proof in the form of a house or senate hearing, or STFU Rachel.

View user profile
Quit throwing rocks at Rachel, Sea.  This story is not exclusive to her by ANY means.   The investigation is ongoing, and more may be revealed.  Just stay tuned.

View user profile
I guess you didn't notice the numerous issues that the pubs wanted records of during Obama's terms.

There will be no cooperation... no disclosure... no transparency... no satisfaction.

Get a clue.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:I do not see a problem here.  None.  Nothing which has been presented is even close to a problem.   Legally or ethically.   A new administration reaching out with policy parameters to a foreign nation is not treason or even illegal.  It is simply a conversation.    The idea of the campaign working in conjunction with the Russians needs to have hard proof for me even to raise an eyebrow.  All I hear is innuendo and a tempest in a teapot.   That is exactly what got President Trump elected.   Now, If you have a transcript where Flynn is doing a quid pro quo which was harmful to the American people, or a transcript showing money or influence being traded to betray America, I am all in with roasting the bastards, but nope.......this is just Maddow attempting to create a storm of media attention to profit and raise her ratings.......sorry, Fox and MSNBC make money from noise.   I would like to see facts and transcripts and statute which has been violated.  I see absolutely nothing in this absent proof.  Innuendo is not proof.   It is a great lead story for people piszed with the election of President Trump to tune in, and it is not like we did not see Fox leverage that anger for more profits after President Obama was elected.   Proof in the form of a house or senate hearing, or STFU Rachel.

I can tell you I have rolled my eyes more than once while listening to Maddow ramble on about some obscure historic event that she eventually weaves into a current story, however in the case of Flynn and the Russians I think we are in new territory. As RealLindaL said, this is not Rachel's story, far from it.

The following is from the PBS News Hour. The same chain of events is reported by The Guardian, NYT's, Washington Post as well as network news and on line sources. I'm especially impressed by information given to reporters from the intelligence community who say they have seen and read the transcripts of the conversations between Flynn and the Russians. That is difficult to overlook.


JUDY WOODRUFF: Now: new revelations about contacts between a top aide to President Trump and Russia during the transition between administrations.

Earlier this evening, Hari Sreenivasan recorded this conversation.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Just after Christmas, the Obama administration levied new sanctions against Russia for its alleged role in meddling with the 2016 election.

In the days surrounding that move, Michael Flynn, the incoming Trump White House’s national security adviser, spoke several times by phone with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. The Trump team claimed, after this was first reported in January, that Flynn was trying to arrange a phone call between Mr. Trump and Russian President Putin.

Now The Washington Post reports there may have been other motives for the calls.

For more on all of this, we turn to Greg Miller, national security reporter at The Post.

So, first of all, what was said in these calls?

GREG MILLER, National Security Correspondent, The Washington Post: So, we know now that these calls covered the subject of sanctions.

We have multiple sources telling us that Flynn actually conveyed a signal to the Russian ambassador that the sanctions that the Obama administration was imposing, that the Russian government shouldn’t overreact to them, didn’t need to worry about them, that there would be time soon when they would be able to revisit these policies.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Now, you have nine different sources in your story. How do we know this is what took place on those phone calls?

GREG MILLER: Well, these are phone calls which involved the Russian ambassador to the United States. U.S. intelligence agencies monitor a lot of the communications of Russian officials who are here in Washington and in New York.

So these are calls that were all picked up, collected. There are transcripts of these calls. They were recorded, and there are intelligence reports on these calls.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/top-trump-aide-reportedly-talked-sanctions-russian-envoy/

View user profile
I will type this slowly. There is NOTHING illegal or ethically incorrect about a newly elected administration reaching out to another nation to let them know not to over react because the new administration was going to revisit a policy.

Tom Cotton taking money from lobby groups which support Israel, and voting to undermine active negotiations with Iran is Treason, yet nothing was done about the same. Yet, in the hysteria of everything President Trump does is wrong, this Flynn conversation which did not violate ANYTHING until there is a tape recording of the same where something illegal was done.....is pure bull chit. I cannot believe how MSNBC like Fox has mastered the art of riling up their respective captive audiences and getting worked up about nothing. Sorry just two sides of the same coin, and I have had enough of this nonsense. Ratings take first priority and common sense and understanding of the law takes a distant second place. Who cares what Flynn said to the Polish ambassador or the Nigerian ambassador about what the new goals would be under President Trump. Again, show me transcripts, hold hearings or STFU MSNBC and FOX......like lemmings being led to the cliff this nation is being played by inherent differences in this nation for ratings. Shameful.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:I will type this slowly.  There is NOTHING illegal or ethically incorrect about a newly elected administration reaching out to another nation to let them know not to over react because the new administration was going to revisit a policy.

Actually, as I understand it from several knowledgeable talking heads, it absolutely IS illegal -- seems I heard the word traitorous -- to communicate with a foreign power for the purpose of undermining the impact of foreign policy rulings (read in this case: sanctions) of a sitting administration.  I'm amazed that you can't see how that is wrong.  Flynn had NO authority to take these matters into his own hands when he did, if he did.

Now perhaps I misunderstood or got it wrong.  I'm willing to be corrected, but not by Seaoat.

I just suggest we all sit back and take a wait and see attitude for a while, see how this plays out.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:President Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space."

President Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…"

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

NO equivalency here, Pkr, and thank you for providing the opportunity for me to make the point:   OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT during this discussion.  This is entirely different from someone NOT in or authorized by a sitting, sworn administration, going about trying to undermine the foreign policy rulings of the person currently in power.  

Surely you can see the difference.

View user profile
I'm amazed that you can't see how that is wrong. Flynn had NO authority to take these matters into his own hands when he did, if he did.


I will listen to such nonsense which was regularly used against President Obama and I regularly destroyed the nonsense which was being presented, but I will not correct you because you have not even taking a specific position to be corrected. It is the same hysteria that everything President Obama was doing was wrong, and he was being advised by Wright, Jones, and that terrorist from the University of Illinois Chicago......pure innuendo and the absence of facts.

First, give me the transcript which Flynn did something allegedly illegal. Second, give me the enabling statute which has all the elements met which makes what he did a crime. Sound familiar. Hillary had this same chit pulled on her by fools who were listening to people manipulate the message with pure propaganda. Hold a hearing. Introduce facts. Show me the alleged criminal act, and then I could correct you, but doing what the Repbulicans did to Hillary is repulsive to me...............sorry I followed MSNBC religiously because I thought they brought intelligence and concern for the country, but in the end they were wrong in so many ways, and not one bit better than Fox who had mastered riling up their base with propaganda and innuendo. I will wait until you actually have something beyond people have said what Flynn did was wrong.......OMG am I the only one who sees what is happening. Keep your ammo dry and pick your battles because rich folks are not paying their fair share since the new executive orders, and no detail and hard journalism about the same because it does not get ratings.....but a general selling out to the ruskies.....oh my.

View user profile
Where are the stories which make it clear the impact of the revocation of the tax components of the Affordable Care Act. The rich folks are not paying their fair share. Middle class Americans will have to pick up the difference. Where is Rachel breaking down the tax bill with experts and hard facts showing how much my brother is now saving not paying the taxes associated with the Affordable Care Act. Next, let some insurance experts do real stories about the flaws in the affordable care act, and suggested improvements. You see Flynn had every right to have a conversation that the new administration will revisit all aspects of the relation with Russia. There is no broken law. There is not one fact to suggest the same, except idiots like the ones who said gross negligence of Hillary Clinton was a crime.....it was not, but it did not stop the coverage and idiots yelling lock her up. Now, with Trump, MSNBC had record ratings last year and they do not want the gravy train to end, so the Fox Strategy works, and meanwhile meaningful legislation which helps Americans falls through the safety net because media is more concerned about making a buck, and fools rush to justify their concerns about President Trump with pretend and unsubstantiated innuendo. Stop it. Follow the dollars and fix America, and make the bastards who stole it pay. It is that simple.

View user profile
Keep digging, Oats.

Flynn's already halfway out the door.

View user profile
We've never seen a President downplay, outright deny and defend a hostile nation like Trump has done especially after it was proven they hacked our election. It is not normal and highly suspicious. If you can't see that Oatie you need to take another look.

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:President Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space."

President Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…"

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

NO equivalency here, Pkr, and thank you for providing the opportunity for me to make the point:   OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT during this discussion.  This is entirely different from someone NOT in or authorized by a sitting, sworn administration, going about trying to undermine the foreign policy rulings of the person currently in power.  

Surely you can see the difference.

It was during the 2012 campaign... and it's certainly equivocation. We get the leadership that we deserve.

Unless we apply one set of firm standards... we'll be treated like domesticated livestock.


View user profile
No, Pkr. not even close. Obama was President as Linda said.

View user profile
What amazes me is that people think if presented with facts of a quid pro quo, I will defend Flynn. I will not. Hillary Clinton was attacked wrongfully that using a personal server negligently was a crime. It was not. No matter how many times I asked for proof of the same in statute or fact, I simply had the wrong law and lying facts continue to back up the Fox agenda to lock her up.

Now without a shred of proof as to any quid pro quo, or treason where he actively worked with the Russians to interfere with the election, people are doing the same thing which was done to Hillary. I just call ball and strikes, and when you get so caught up in your team that you no longer can objectively see what a ball is and what a strike is, the entire premise of American democracy shatters as idiocy has won the day. Call for investigations. Release the tapes. Find the quid pro quo or treason......no problem with the same, but to conclude that somebody was wrong or did something wrong simply speaking to Russians.....please stop it. I do not want to offend anybody, but that is too Markle like, and we finally got the stench off this forum where people want to discuss truth and facts......and now a person is being skewered on this forum and in the media without proof of those allegations.

View user profile
I just ran across the name of the law I'd heard referred to: the Logan Act, forbidding American citizens from interfering in foreign diplomacy. Unfortunately it's apparently based on a very old statute (1799) and has never been prosecuted -- at least not yet. But then we've never had an administration or group of people like Trump's picks, either. Never.

And speaking of Trump, if he EVER had any inkling during his term that someone not in his administration had phoned a foreign government and IN ANY WAY tried to undermine or even just soften his authority and/or actions against that regime, well, you can just imagine.

Look, I've said let's wait and see and that's what I plan to do. I'm not calling anyone guilty without evidence but am only speculating, a favorite American pastime. Don't try to tell me Seaoat has never played 'what if.'

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 3]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum