What do you think about the leaks regarding NSC Michael Flynn affair?

1. 81

   jackclee lmposted 7 years ago

   Who is doing the leaking? Why are they leaking to the press?
   Are there laws broken? By whom?
   It seems to me, there is more swamp to drain in Washington DC...

   replyreport
   1. 93

      lions44posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The leaks are not relevant.  I don't know why Trump supporters keep harping on this nonsense. This is an attempt to obscure the real issue. Can you imagine if Obama's NSA Director talked to the Russian foreign minister about sanctions prior to being appointed? 
      
      It's Flynn's ties to the Russians that matter. Leaks are common, everyday practices in D.C.  If they stopped, then the public would lose out.  You should be asking why was Flynn obsessed with Putin ( I can answer that too if you'd like).   General Flynn used incredibly poor judgment in associating with the Russian government publicly (and who knows privately). 
      
      Did Flynn break any laws? No.  While I'm glad he's gone, I certainly don't think he did anything to break the law. He was not really a private citizen when the supposed conversation with the ambassador took place.  So I'll give him a pass.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         jackclee lmposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Good, I guess you have no problem with wikileaks either...
         Or it depends on who it hurts?

         replyreport
         1. 93

            lions44posted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Completely different.  Reporters getting info on background is not the same as disclosing classified material.   Assange is an anti-American punk who is out to do damage to our country.  Maggie Habermann, Jake Tapper or Jim Acosta are not out to destroy the nation.   Trump followers can't distinguish between the two.   Can't you see the difference?

            replyreport
            1. 81

               jackclee lmposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               So a general who served the country honorable for 30+ years is not to be trusted?
               I actually trust wikileaks more than some that work in the State department...

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  The same "honorable" general who was fired before by Obama for being out of control? The same one who spread rumors that Hillary Clinton was running a child sex ring?
                  
                  It's clear that some people trust the Wikileaks run by Russian intelligence more than they trust the CIA, FBI and NSA.

                  replyreport
            2. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Well said, Lions. There are biased journalists with respectable news organizations, but nearly all of the ones I have met during my career have been dedicated to reporting news as factually as possible.

               replyreport
      2. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         The story has grown. Now it's ongoing communication between Trump aides and the Russians during the campaign.
         
         More information about Flynn and the others is on the way, according to various reports.

         replyreport
      3. 88

         GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Hello lions44, I agree with your perspective. Attacking the leaking is just attacking the messenger. I also think it is a positive thing that there was no politics-driven defense of Flynn's actions from the administration.
         
         But, there is still the lingering question of motivation; Why would Flynn involve himself in the alleged conversation? I am not inclined to look-up his resume', but he cannot have achieved his level of career success if he was so naive as to not understand the circumstances of the event.
         
         Of course, someone may think that is just the case. But I don't think so. And I think it is the motivation that will tell just how bad, or harmless this breech was.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 93

            lions44posted 7 years agoin reply to this

            GA, very simple answer about Flynn's conversation and his "admiration" for Putin (the same goes for all of Trump's supporters).  They see Putin as a modern day Charles Martel, fighting off the Islamic "hordes" entering Europe. Russia's war in Chechyna, South Ossetia and other places along their long border as seen as part of the long struggle against terrorism.  Flynn and Trump have decided that Russia is a partner in the fight against Islamic terror.   That's it.    Very simple.  Is race involved?  You decide.
            
            But the reality is much different, Russia is not helping us fight ISIS and don't want to see us free of Islamic terror. In fact, just the opposite. They want the U.S. (and the West in general) bogged down by terror attacks.  So Trump's thesis is dramatically flawed.  Why do they look the other way in Ukraine?  Don't know.  It's a phony separatist movement ginned up by Putin's government.  Our silence is embarrassing. 
            
            On a final note:   If Putin looked like the President of Turkmenistan, something tells me that Trump and Flynn would not be such big fans.      Stay well, GA.

            replyreport
            1. 88

               GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Hello again Lions44, You have carried this to a much more comprehensive view than I intended. I haven't looked into this enough to know if it would even help to look-up your Charles Martel analogy.
               
               Your view sounds feasible, especially the part about Pres. Trump not getting the results he is expecting, but until more specifics come out, I have to leave my opinion where it is - unformed beyond my first agreement with your comment. And a suspicion that it would not be improbable that Pres. Trump and Gen. Flynn may have had an agenda.
               
               GA

               replyreport
   2. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The issue is TREASON by Trump aides. The leaks are putting a stop to the treason.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         jackclee lmposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         What treason? You got be kidding. A difference of opinion by goverment staff is common and expected. Your TDS is way over the top. Use your brain and look at rhis for what it is and not what you hope it to be. I get that you don't like Trump but he is the president and he gets to pick his staff and his policies. The only crime Flynn commited is lying to his boss and it is a trust issue and not a security issue.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Have you read the news? Trump aides including Flynn talked to Russian intelligence throughout the campaign.
            
            How many times do the CIA, FBI and NSA have to come out with evidence linking them together? Are they all lying?
            
            Do you want Russia to choose our president for us or not?
            
            The blind defense of Trump and his aides with their Russian connections by supporters is not only discraceful but dangerous to our democracy.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Others have said that the CIA, etc. have claimed Trump had a close personal and business relationship with Putin.  Some have even claimed that aides have engaged in "the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government" (treason). 
               
               Hard to know who to believe, isn't it?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  I appreciate the measured response. The CIA, FBI and NSA have said they have proven some of the allegations.
                  
                  My question to you is, should we believe them or not?

                  replyreport
                  1. 94

                     wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     At this point, take them with a grain of salt.  Too many people are blowing a molehill into a mountain, with a few presenting outright lies. 
                     
                     So wait and see.  Decide when there is more "information", and something more than a mere claim of something that may or may not be important.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        With respect, I think you are assuming that the course of action will follow normal legal channels. I don't believe Washington works that way in situations as dangerous as this one.
                        
                        The intelligence community, establishment GOPers in the Trump administration (i.e., Pence and Priebus) and others will continue the news leaks until Trump's public support reaches a low point and then they will reveal something illegal.
                        
                        Then they will give Trump a choice of resigning or getting impeaced. Pence will be president by sometime in 2018.

                        replyreport
                  2. 94

                     wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Personally, I would find it much more useful, informative and reasonable to debate the results of his actions rather than presumed effects of things that may or may not have happened at all. 
                     
                     The good and bad of the rescinding of the regs about companies reporting payments to foreign countries, perhaps. Actual debate of the reasons and desired results of the travel ban even.  Much more useful than digging for dirt. Possibilities for a new Obamacare or immigrant policy.   IMO
                     
                     One is constructive, one is almost exclusively destructive.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        I'm not presuming things that may or may not have happened.
                        
                        I'm reacting to a steady stream of leaks, news reports and even public announcements by the intelligence community about connections between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence.
                        
                        They will continue with the blessings of the GOP establishment until Trump is gone and Pence takes over.

                        replyreport
                        1. 94

                           wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Yes, I know.  A stream of leaks, by law breakers intent on a witch hunt and doing whatever works to get the President out of office without ever knowing what he might or might not accomplish.
                           
                           Not much into witch hunts; we've seen plenty over the past few decades.  Even impeached a president for denying that oral sex was a sexual encounter.  Witch hunts have a habit of confirming what those with high levels of political power say - witness the "innocence" of Clinton - and a part of what needs cleaned up in the swamp.  Not much into "connections" which mysteriously turn into "treason".  Or even the flood I'm seeing about how evil Trumps entire family is, why their marriage is ending or he doesn't want his son. 
                           
                           Just sick of it all - it's incomprehensible that we as a nation have deteriorated to this point.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                              I agree.

                              replyreport
      2. 88

         GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Baloney!
         
         Consider the facts you know which prompted you to be so adamant: he had publicly acknowledged conversations with a Russian Government Representative, that included sanctions talk.
         
         Isn't that really all you know? You don't know the details of the sanctions talk, you don't know if any pro-Russia offers or deals were discussed. You don't know if any national secrets were discussed. You don't know if any plans of collusion were involved. I don't see any evidence of treasonous crimes in what you do know.
         
         On the other hand, I haven't followed this latest story since yesterday, (or so), so maybe you do know some of those things I said you didn't know, which would show just how much I don't know.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 0

            promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Baloney yourself.
            
            I'll repeat. Have you read the news? Trump aides including Flynn talked to Russian intelligence throughout the campaign.
            
            How many times do the CIA, FBI and NSA have to come out with evidence linking them together? Are they all lying?
            
            Do you want Russia to choose our president for us or not?

            replyreport
            1. 88

               GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Hey guy, Then I also will repeat, I have not followed this story in-depth for a couple days, (it was a day or so originally).
               
               So I do not know all that CIA, FBI, NSA stuff had happened. I remember allegations, assumptions, and presumptions, but I don't recall any factual conclusions. I am also not looking back to all the campaign accusations. I recall looking into several allegations during Trump's campaign, relative to this topic, that never materialized as facts - so I'm just going to wait until facts come out on this one too.
               
               Until then, your rhetoric proclaiming treason, and your reliance on past unproven allegations as verification, have no substance.
               
               You could be right. But that is a long way from being proven, or even qualifying for consideration. That is why I said baloney. Your declaration of treason is so unsupported by currently known facts that it can be nothing more than baloney.
               
               GA

               replyreport
   3. 78

      Credence2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      If you're not guilty of inappropriate behavior, then you would be less concerned about 'leaks'. Trump and his clowns are their wetting pants, those are the leaks we are all paying attention to....

      replyreport
      1. 94

         wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Yeah, we saw that with the liberal's complete lack of concern over Hillarys security attitude, too.  Glad at least someone cares about such things and takes security seriously.

         replyreport
         1. 78

            Credence2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

            But, your ManTrump is President now, so he is now where the spotlight lies...... So, let's see how well he does under its relentless glare?

            replyreport
         2. 0

            promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Although I am not a liberal, I would have voted against her for the email server alone if the Republicans had put forth Kasich or some other candidate who was more trustworthy.

            replyreport
      2. 81

         jackclee lmposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Really, then why did he have to resign. He didn't do anything illegal. If he did? Why didn't they charge him with a crime instead of leaking the info to the press?
         Use your head, what was done to Flynn was unamerican, if you support it now, wait till a democrat is in office next time...
         
         What is wrong should be wrong no matter who is in office? Agreed?
         
         Cooler heads should prevail.
         Let's get to the bottom of this...
         Who leaked and why?

         replyreport
   4. 81

      jackclee lmposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I saw judge Napolitano on Fox news making the claim that it would be very difficult to catch the leakers. I disagree. Even I can imaging a simple scenario, where a trap can be set up to catch the suspected leakers at the NSA, the CIA or the FBI... I didn't even watch all the episodes of House of Cards...
      
      Here is how I would do it...
      I would gather a few trusted members of the Team. I would create a few false but credible documents marked highly confidential.. I would identify a few people in NSA that I suspect may be the leaker.
      I would release these documents to the few with clearance and for "on a need to know basis"...
      Then, I would sit back and watch where they turn up in the media. If they do, then it would be clear and easy to track which person in NSA had direct access and by which mechanism they use to leak it to the press... I will repeat this process for suspected personel while conducting business as usual.
      At the conclusion of 3 months, I will be able to flush out all these leakers all on the same day. No warning, and they will be arrested and locked up and given legal consel ...
      All the accompany documentation will be exhibited in a court of law or military justice. They will either admit their guilt or go to trial... In either case, if they are found guilty, they will be harshly punished to the full extent of the law, and a message would be sent to all personel  who might even contemplate doing the same with our intelligence. End of story...
      It can be done and should be done to clear the swamp. There is no room for subversion. If people do not agree with the current administration, they should resign their post in protest. That is the American way. None of this shadow government stuff...

      replyreport
2. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   Trump needs to fire every last employee of these government  institutions THAT WERE THERE  during Obama's terms .  There lay the leaks , the opposition  ,  and the  worse cases of  divisiveness  and    ideological hatred in America .! 
   
   He should also selectively kick the opposition media out of the white house .

   replyreport
   1. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Pence will soon be firing everyone in the Trump administration -- the handful Trump has actually hired -- after he becomes president.

      replyreport
3. 77

   Kathleen Cochranposted 7 years ago

   Good point, lions44.  Not seeing that difference empowers bad actors like WikiLeaks.  In this Internet era, we need to be better-educated consumers of news.

   replyreport
4. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   It has already been determined that Flynn broke no federal laws  ! Except that he inadvertently deceived his employers  ,the President  and Vice President .    I wonder why the leaks can't be stopped if they know who did them ?  Yet ,  Its got to be hold over Obama employees ; Who else would sabotage this  administration ?
   
   The left seems to forget that Russia is not in any way  a reliable critic of democracy ,  They are more than willing to embarrass the US. especially to US. allies  as has always been their political  mission .
   
   Trump needs to get and remain  tougher within and without our borders .

   replyreport
   1. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Who says he broke no federal laws? You? What do you know that the FBI, CIA and NSA don't know?

      replyreport
5. 88

   Stacie Lposted 7 years ago

   As this back biting and jockeying for position in the Trump administration reminds me of how the contestants behaved on "The Apprentice."
   Is he encouraging this somehow?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      "Pence spokesman Marc Lotter told reporters that the vice president first became aware of the “incomplete information” Flynn had provided him by reading the same newspaper account." - Washington Post
      
      Trump kept Pence -- the most senior and experienced politician in his administration -- in the dark for more than two weeks.
      
      It sounds like Trump doesn't trust anyone except for a select few.

      replyreport