Flynn Is Trump’s Just Deserts

[CageTheBengal]

Trump should just fire all of these incompetents around him because after all we know one man can fix everything and he is that man!

Quote:Donald Trump’s zeal for extreme vetting has one glaring exception, one gaping blind spot: his own administration.

If you’re a bedraggled sixth-grader from a beleaguered country where the Quran is a popular text, he will stop you at our border. If you’re a retired lieutenant general who hallucinates an Islamic terrorist behind every last garden shrub in America, he will welcome you to the White House.

Michael Flynn’s fall was foreordained, predictable by anyone with the time, patience and fundamental seriousness to take an unblinking look at his past, brimming as it was with accusations of shoddy stewardship and instances of rashness.

This is a man who once claimed that Arabic signs along the Mexican border pointed terrorists toward the United States — and who never provided any corroboration of that. I learned of this particular bit of hysteria when it was being discussed one night on Anderson Cooper’s show on CNN. The Trump apologist Kayleigh McEnany was asked for her reaction. She said that no one could prove that there weren’t such signs.

Trump sold himself to Americans the way almost everyone who tries to make the transition from the private sector to public service does. Supposedly, he knew how to manage in a way that government bureaucrats don’t, because he was from a realm of ultimate accountability.

But I can’t imagine any levelheaded chief executive having the most delicate of conversations about his enterprise out in the open, as Trump did at Mar-a-Lago on Saturday night, discussing North Korea’s missile launch.

And the cornerstone of management is the assembling of a team that’s competent and trustworthy. Trump put his together in a cavalier fashion, enchanted by people who were high on energy even if they were low on sanity, decency, discretion, humility or some combination of the above.

And so we got Flynn, Stephen Miller and others whose stridency makes for a good show — Trump relishes a good show — but is a recipe for precisely the kind of recklessness that did in Flynn, who played footsie with the Russians and then lied about it.

With this president there’s a surfeit of provocation and a dearth of due diligence.

Where was the vetting, extreme or otherwise, of Mick Mulvaney, the congressman tapped for the Office of Management and Budget? Oops: He had a nanny for whom he’d failed to pay more than $15,000 in taxes.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

Where was the vetting, extreme or otherwise, of Steve Mnuchin, just confirmed as treasury secretary? Oops: He had all this offshore wealth and nearly $100 million worth of real-estate assets that he initially failed to mention in financial disclosure forms.

Where was the vetting — or, more to the point, the preparation — of Betsy DeVos, our new education secretary, who waltzed into her confirmation hearing and theorized that the greatest pedagogical threat to America’s schoolchildren was toothy, furry and fond of salmon.

There have been so many embarrassments with so many nominees that a few who’d be in the foreground of the news otherwise have been spared the derision they deserve.

Andrew Puzder, for instance. He’s up for labor secretary, and his confirmation hearing has been delayed four times as he deals with a tangle of financial interests that are only the half of it.

Puzder runs the fast-food chains Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr. and has spoken dreamily of how much he’d like to install robots in place of human workers — you know, the kind the labor department is supposed to protect. In a memo to Hardee’s managers, he once wrote, “No more people behind the counter unless they have all their teeth.”

He’s cuddly, this one. Randy, too. He took great pride in a Carl’s Jr. ad campaign in which models in bikinis wrapped their lips around fleshy, gooey cheeseburgers, giving a whole new meaning to the phrase “food porn.” One ad had a woman whose bare breasts were obscured by melons. Oh, the wit!

Say what you will about DeVos, she never suggested that geometry be taught by Chippendales dancers doing things with protractors that Pythagoras never envisioned. Nor did she spout anything along the lines of Puzder’s responses when he was asked about the prospect of joining Trump’s cabinet. He speculated that it would be “the most fun you could have with your clothes on.”

I like to think that years from now, we’ll be so far past this messy and terrifying moment that we’ll look back wistfully at the parlor games it gave us, chief among them Who’s Your Nightmare Nominee?

I’ve been in groups that passed many apocalyptic hours this way, though the conversation did grow redundant: Flynn, DeVos, Rick Perry, Flynn, Ben Carson, Flynn, Flynn, Flynn.

Well, the Flynn nightmare is over. It lasted all of 24 days. It wouldn’t have lasted one if our president cared about the most important kinds of vetting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/opinion/flynn-is-trumps-just-deserts.html?ribbon-ad-idx=5&src=trending&module=Ribbon&version=origin&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Trending&pgtype=article

[Belsnickel]

Desserts*

[Benton]

(02-14-2017, 01:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Desserts*

Given the apocalyptic wasteland angle... grammar faux pas is acceptable.

[BmorePat87]

(02-14-2017, 01:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Desserts*

6th grade math teacher told us:

Desert is one "s" and desserts is two "S's" because you'd rather have two desserts than two deserts. 

[*bfine32*]

Trump sure does deserve his deserts.

[NATI BENGALS]

I cant believe people are upset Trumps right hand man had secret conversations with Russia while they hacked and influenced our election.

Luckily my Trump shirt and MAGA hat are clean as I proudly wear them today and support the GOPers who take Trumps lead and investigate the real problem... How did the American people find out the truth?

[BmorePat87]

How dare the Senate question the qualifications of these people and the press report what they do.

[BoomerFan]

"Great people! The best people!"

[*michaelsean*]

(02-14-2017, 02:12 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: 6th grade math teacher told us:

Desert is one "s" and desserts is two "S's" because you'd rather have two desserts than two deserts. 

The problem is "desert" and "dessert" go against the common pronunciation rules.  I'm guessing you knew that though.

[BengalHawk62]

Gen. Petraeus could be his replacement?  WTF?   So the NSA who was in bed with Russia could be replaced by a person who is on probation for leaking secret govt files???  


Sounds like Trumpet logic to me. 

[BmorePat87]

(02-14-2017, 03:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: The problem is "desert" and "dessert" go against the common pronunciation rules.  I'm guessing you knew that though.

Damn Frenchies influencing the English language and causing some words to not follow the rules! And then if I desert someone, it's pronounced like dessert!


Though, OP is correct. It is "just deserts" because deserts has an archaic meaning of a punishment or reward. . 

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-14-2017, 04:03 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Gen. Petraeus could be his replacement?  WTF?   So the NSA who was in bed with Russia could be replaced by a person who is on probation for leaking secret govt files???  


Sounds like Trumpet logic to me. 

Well the Press Secretary just said it. And Trump tweeted it earlier. The real concern is these secrets getting out. In the theme of all of his cabinet nominees , which is to be uniquely unqualified for the specific position , nothing says national security like a a general leaking secrets. 

Never question the decisions made by this brilliant man. 

I thought the photo op with the nuclear football this weekend was fun. And the way he handled a national security issue surrounded by who knows who while dining at his resort only made me more confident we are totally safe in those baby little hands.

[GMDino]

Trump denied knowing anything about it.

Trump knew.  Everyone knew.

Trump lied.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/justice-department-warned-white-house-that-flynn-could-be-vulnerable-to-russian-blackmail-officials-say/2017/02/13/fc5dab88-f228-11e6-8d72-263470bf0401_story.html?utm_term=.6cad9f27a675

Quote:The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said.

The message, delivered by Sally Q. Yates and a senior career national security official to the White House counsel, was prompted by concerns that ­Flynn, when asked about his calls and texts with the ­Russian diplomat, had told Vice ­President-elect Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the 2016 election, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the ­information.

Flynn resigned Monday night in the wake of revelations about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.
Checkpoint newsletter

Sign up
[Read Michael Flynn’s resignation letter]
In the waning days of the Obama administration, James R. Clapper Jr., who was the director of national intelligence, and John Brennan, the CIA director at the time, shared Yates’s concerns and concurred with her recommendation to inform the Trump White House. They feared that “Flynn had put himself in a compromising position” and thought that Pence had a right to know that he had been misled, according to one of the officials, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

A senior Trump administration official said before Flynn’s resignation that the White House was aware of the matter, adding that “we’ve been working on this for weeks.”

The current and former officials said that although they believed that Pence was misled about the contents of Flynn’s communications with the Russian ambassador, they couldn’t rule out that Flynn was acting with the knowledge of others in the transition.

The FBI, Yates, Clapper and Brennan declined to comment on the matter.

In a Feb. 8 interview with The Washington Post, Flynn categorically denied discussing sanctions with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, repeating public assertions made in January by top Trump officials. One day after the interview, Flynn revised his account, telling The Post through a spokesman that he “couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.”

Two officials said a main topic of the relevant call was the sanctions. Officials also said there was no evidence that Russia had attempted to exploit the discrepancy between public statements by Trump officials and what ­Flynn had discussed.

[National security adviser Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador]

Flynn told The Post earlier this month that he first met Kislyak in 2013, when Flynn was director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and made a trip to Moscow.

U.S. intelligence reports during the 2016 presidential campaign showed that Kislyak was in touch with Flynn, officials said.
Communications between the two continued after Trump’s victory on Nov. 8, according to officials with access to intelligence reports on the matter.

Kislyak, in a brief interview with The Post, confirmed having contacts with Flynn before and after the election, but he declined to say what was discussed.

For Yates and other officials, concerns about the communications peaked in the days after the Obama administration on Dec. 29 announced measures to punish Russia for what it said was the Kremlin’s interference in the election in an attempt to help Trump.

After the sanctions were rolled out, the Obama administration braced itself for the Russian retaliation. To the surprise of many U.S. officials, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on Dec. 30 that there would be no response. Trump praised the decision on Twitter.

Intelligence analysts began to search for clues that could help explain Putin’s move. The search turned up Kislyak’s communications, which the FBI routinely monitors, and the phone call in question with Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general with years of intelligence experience.

[The fall of Michael Flynn: A timeline]

From that call and subsequent intercepts, FBI agents wrote a secret report summarizing ­Flynn’s discussions with Kislyak.

Yates, then the deputy attorney general, considered Flynn’s comments in the intercepted call to be “highly significant” and “potentially illegal,” according to an official familiar with her thinking.

Yates and other intelligence officials suspected that Flynn could be in violation of an obscure U.S. statute known as the Logan Act, which bars U.S. citizens from interfering in diplomatic disputes with another country.

At the same time, Yates and other law enforcement officials knew there was little chance of bringing against Flynn a case related to the Logan Act, a statute that has never been used in a prosecution. In addition to the legal and political hurdles, Yates and other officials were aware of an FBI investigation looking at possible contacts between Trump associates and Russia, which now included the Flynn-Kislyak communications.

Word of the calls leaked out on Jan. 12 in an op-ed by Post columnist David Ignatius. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut U.S. sanctions?” Ignatius wrote, citing the Logan Act.

The next day, a Trump transition official told The Post, “I can tell you that during his call, sanctions were not discussed whatsoever.”

White House press secretary Sean Spicer, in a conference call with reporters on Jan. 13, said that the conversation between Flynn and Kislyak had “centered on the logistics” of a post-inauguration call between Trump and Putin. “That was it, plain and simple,” Spicer added.

On Jan. 15, Pence was asked about the phone call during an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Citing a conversation he had with Flynn, Pence said the incoming national security adviser and Kislyak “did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia.”

Before the Pence statement on Jan. 15, top Justice Department and intelligence officials had discussed whether the incoming Trump White House should be notified about the contents of the Flynn-Kislyak communications.

Pence’s statement on CBS made the issue more urgent, current and former officials said, because U.S. intelligence agencies had reason to believe that Russia was aware that Flynn and Kislyak had discussed sanctions in their December call, contrary to public statements.

The internal debate over how to handle the intelligence on Flynn and Kislyak came to a head on Jan. 19, Obama’s last full day in office.

Yates, Clapper and Brennan argued for briefing the incoming administration so the new president could decide how to deal with the matter. The officials discussed options, including telling Pence, the incoming White House counsel, the incoming chief of staff or Trump himself.

FBI Director James B. Comey initially opposed notification, citing concerns that it could complicate the agency’s ­investigation.

Clapper and Brennan left their positions when Trump was sworn in, but Yates stayed on as acting attorney general until Jan. 30, when Trump fired her for refusing to defend his executive order temporarily barring refugees and people from seven majority-Muslim countries — an action that had been challenged in court.

A turning point came after Jan. 23, when Spicer, in his first official media briefing, again was asked about Flynn’s communications with Kislyak. Spicer said that he had talked to Flynn about the issue “again last night.” There was just “one call,” Spicer said. And it covered four subjects: a plane crash that claimed the lives of a Russian military choir; Christmas greetings; Russian-led talks over the Syrian civil war; and the logistics of setting up a call between Putin and Trump. Spicer said that was the extent of the conversation.

Yates again raised the issue with Comey, who now backed away from his opposition to informing the White House. Yates and the senior career national security official spoke to McGahn, the White House counsel, who didn’t respond Monday to a request for comment.

Trump declined to publicly back his national security adviser after the news broke.

On Monday afternoon, Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, said Trump had “full confidence” in Flynn. Minutes later, however, Spicer delivered a contradictory statement to ­reporters.

“The president is evaluating the situation,” Spicer’s statement read. “He’s speaking to Vice President Pence relative to the conversation the vice president had with Gen. Flynn and also speaking to various other people about what he considers the single most important subject there is: Our national security.”

And then late Monday, Flynn resigned.

[Benton]

"Yes, President Trump, I would love to accompany you to Canada and discuss security issues. Just let me phone my probation officer and see if they can get my ankle bracelet off for the weekend."

— David "Betray Us" Petraeus

[Belsnickel]

(02-14-2017, 05:28 PM)Benton Wrote: "Yes, President Trump, I would love to accompany you to Canada and discuss security issues. Just let me phone my probation officer and see if they can get my ankle bracelet off for the weekend."

— David "Betray Us" Petraeus

Hell, not just Canada. Even if they go to White House South for the weekend he would need to get approval.

[Benton]

(02-14-2017, 05:29 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Hell, not just Canada. Even if they go to White House South for the weekend he would need to get approval.

Yeah, I screwed up my own joke. It started about going out of the country and I got to the end and realized he's pretty much got to get approval for just about anything to do with the job outside of the office.

[Dill]

(02-14-2017, 05:28 PM)Benton Wrote: "Yes, President Trump, I would love to accompany you to Canada and discuss security issues. Just let me phone my probation officer and see if they can get my ankle bracelet off for the weekend."

— David "Betray Us" Petraeus

Actually, I would trust Petraeus to do a better job that most anyone Trump and his team thought of on their own.

He was extremely competent . 

But no matter who replaces Flynn, here is the problem--a very competent person will buck Trump/Bannon's policies, and recommend against Yemen-style special ops unless all boxes are checked beforehand. That will rub Trump/Bannon the wrong way. Conflict will escalate. He will quit or be fired. Another scandal.

A Flynn-style advisor who is down with Trump/Bannon's Breitbart-style of vetting will continue producing or aiding in the production of security/policy scandals of the sort we have already seen.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(02-14-2017, 03:04 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I cant believe people are upset Trumps right hand man had secret conversations with Russia while they hacked and influenced our election.

Luckily my Trump shirt and MAGA hat are clean as I proudly wear them today and support the GOPers who take Trumps lead and investigate the real problem... How did the American people find out the truth?

Russia? really we still stuck on that, even after the 3 muslim brothers were caught funneling emails to an external server?

Flyn is a good guy, and he fell on his sword for what happened. I don't think he was intentionally trying to break any laws.

What I'm wondering is why his conversation was being recorded and who leaked it to the Press. Dam Russians, dey be everywhere or was it dem pesky muslim brothers again?

[HarleyDog]

(02-14-2017, 08:55 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: What I'm wondering is why his conversation was being recorded and who leaked it to the Press.

Don't have to look outside our borders to figure this one out. They are in plain site. Just turn you head to your left.

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-14-2017, 08:55 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Russia? really we still stuck on that, even after the 3 muslim brothers were caught funneling emails to an external server?

Flyn is a good guy, and he fell on his sword for what happened. I don't think he was intentionally trying to break any laws.

What I'm wondering is why his conversation was being recorded and who leaked it to the Press. Dam Russians, dey be everywhere or was it dem pesky muslim brothers again?

First I have heard of any muslim brothers and emails. Link? Last I saw our national intelligence agencies agreed Russia aimed to help Trump win the White House. 

And a person in the position of Flynn knows why the conversation was being monitored.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-reviewed-flynns-calls-with-russian-ambassador-but-found-nothing-illicit/2017/01/23/aa83879a-e1ae-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html?utm_term=.ce9bf6279643

The FBI’s counterintelligence agents listen to calls all the time that do not pertain to any open investigation, current and former law enforcement officials said. Often, said one former official, “they’re just monitoring the other [foreign official] side of the call.”



The calls were picked up as part of routine electronic surveillance of Russian officials and agents in the United States, which is one of the FBI’s responsibilities, according to the U.S. officials