billvon 3,006 #51 February 14, 2017 Russian lawmakers are upset that their mole got the boot. From WaPo: ============= Leading Russian lawmakers rushed to defend President Trump’s former national security adviser Tuesday after he resigned amid furor over his misleading statements to senior White House officials, including Vice President Pence, about his contacts with Russia. The heads of the foreign-affairs committees in Russia’s upper and lower houses of parliament chalked up Michael Flynn’s resignation to a dark campaign of Russophobia in Washington, and said it would undermine relations between the White House and the Kremlin. ============= Putin, quickly realizing that this might be seen as undermining his boy Trump, clamps down: ============ Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov refused to comment on Flynn's resignation, saying it's an internal matter for Trump's administration and "none of our business." Asked if Moscow still hopes for its relations with the U.S. to improve, he said it is "too early to say" since "Trump's team has not been shaped yet." By early afternoon, some lawmakers began to retract their original indignant comments, in line with the restrained tone taken by the Kremlin. Leonid Slutsky, chairman of the foreign affairs committee at the State Duma, first described Flynn's departure as a "negative signal" for Russia-U.S. relations, but two hours later switched to more moderate language, stressing that it "cannot fundamentally influence Russia-U.S. ties." ============= Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #52 February 14, 2017 Phil1111What about the loss to the CIA of a secure phone tap into the Russian ambassadors phone that these disclosures laid bare. I'm reasonably certain both sides know each is spying on the other and especially when it comes to calls to or from officials such as ambassadors. It takes a special kind of high level nitwit (and apparently Flynn is in that set) to not realize this. I can understand it from maybe you or any other "normal" person, but holy hell man, how dumb of a government official do you have to be to not understand what the job of the NSA is?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aphid 0 #53 February 15, 2017 quade***What about the loss to the CIA of a secure phone tap into the Russian ambassadors phone that these disclosures laid bare. I'm reasonably certain both sides know each is spying on the other and especially when it comes to calls to or from officials such as ambassadors. It takes a special kind of high level nitwit (and apparently Flynn is in that set) to not realize this. I can understand it from maybe you or any other "normal" person, but holy hell man, how dumb of a government official do you have to be to not understand what the job of the NSA is? Perhaps his career didn't enable him to consider that possibility? 2002 to 2004: Commanded 111th Military Intelligence Brigade 2004 to 2007: Director of Intelligence for Joint Special Operations Command 2007 to 2008: Director of Intelligence, United States Central Command 2008 to 2009: Director of Intelligence, Joint Staff 2009 to 2010: Director of Intelligence, ISAF (Afghanistan) 2011 to 2012: Office of the Director of National Intelligence 2012 to 2014: Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #54 February 15, 2017 aphid******What about the loss to the CIA of a secure phone tap into the Russian ambassadors phone that these disclosures laid bare. I'm reasonably certain both sides know each is spying on the other and especially when it comes to calls to or from officials such as ambassadors. It takes a special kind of high level nitwit (and apparently Flynn is in that set) to not realize this. I can understand it from maybe you or any other "normal" person, but holy hell man, how dumb of a government official do you have to be to not understand what the job of the NSA is? Perhaps his career didn't enable him to consider that possibility? 2002 to 2004: Commanded 111th Military Intelligence Brigade 2004 to 2007: Director of Intelligence for Joint Special Operations Command 2007 to 2008: Director of Intelligence, United States Central Command 2008 to 2009: Director of Intelligence, Joint Staff 2009 to 2010: Director of Intelligence, ISAF (Afghanistan) 2011 to 2012: Office of the Director of National Intelligence 2012 to 2014: Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Did I mention a special kind of high level nitwit?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #55 February 15, 2017 QuoteIt takes a special kind of high level nitwit (and apparently Flynn is in that set) to not realize this. Flynn realized that. He did not get where he is by being ignorant of how intelligence works. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #56 February 15, 2017 billvonQuoteIt takes a special kind of high level nitwit (and apparently Flynn is in that set) to not realize this. Flynn realized that. He did not get where he is by being ignorant of how intelligence works. So, you're saying he made phone calls on unsecured lines so that . . . what? Sure, he made some that were encrypted as well, but he made enough unencrypted ones to hang himself out to dry. That part makes no sense.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #57 February 15, 2017 Who said anything about unsecured phone lines? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 333 #58 February 15, 2017 Pretty interesting the slant foxnews.com has on Flynn -- two article links saying the leaks are the issue, and one say that Mattis downplays the impact of Flynn's resignation, and one about the Russian officials defend Flynn. How about the crime? Nothing. Meanwhile, it is being reported that several campaign aides were in touch with Russian officials known to the CIA during the entire campaign. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #59 February 15, 2017 normiss Who said anything about unsecured phone lines? The part where there are transcripts of conversations. Quote Top aides also reviewed transcripts of Flynn's contacts with the ambassador, according to a person with knowledge of the review process. Source and more: https://apnews.com/44c0a5194f8e429ea799b2f5916485bf/Trump-knew-Flynn-misled-WH-weeks-before-ouster:-officials If there are transcripts, then the line was not secure. Things like this and and the David Petraeus scandal make me wonder how much tradecraft the guys at the top know and this is Spy 101 stuff.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlanS 1 #60 February 15, 2017 quade******... 2011 to 2012: Office of the Director of National Intelligence 2012 to 2014: Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Did I mention a special kind of high level nitwit? Often stupidity and arrogance are indistinguishable when put in action. I think this is a case of the later. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #61 February 15, 2017 Right, my point it, shy do they think it was "secure" when it clearly wasn't at some point of the circuit. Taps are easy. More so when it's a Russian in the US and vice versa. I saw some interesting things at AT&T in DC. It's rather insane what we are currently seeing. This is the 3rd person to get the boot for ties to or involvement of Russia. How do we replace an entire administration? It appears they have been compromised. It's interesting that they are denying it today without specifics of what twas happening as if they are afraid they simply don't know what evidence the FBI has. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CygnusX-1 43 #62 February 15, 2017 quade***What about the loss to the CIA of a secure phone tap into the Russian ambassadors phone that these disclosures laid bare. I'm reasonably certain both sides know each is spying on the other and especially when it comes to calls to or from officials such as ambassadors. It takes a special kind of high level nitwit (and apparently Flynn is in that set) to not realize this. I can understand it from maybe you or any other "normal" person, but holy hell man, how dumb of a government official do you have to be to not understand what the job of the NSA is? I severely doubt that Flynn was ignorant of the fact that the lines were tapped. What is more reasonable is that he did not think he was doing anything wrong. They were the incoming administration and so what if he was passing along what the new administration would do. (Ignorant of what law he broke is more likely.) I also have a hard time believing that this was not discussed BEFORE the call with either Trump or Pence. He is being the fall guy which is exactly why he made the call and not T or P. That and he had the "back-door" contact to Moscow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #63 February 15, 2017 QuoteThings like this and and the David Petraeus scandal make me wonder how much tradecraft the guys at the top know and this is Spy 101 stuff. Right - and Flynn knew his stuff. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #64 February 15, 2017 CygnusX-1I severely doubt that Flynn was ignorant of the fact that the lines were tapped. What is more reasonable is that he did not think he was doing anything wrong. They were the incoming administration and so what if he was passing along what the new administration would do. (Ignorant of what law he broke is more likely.) I also have a hard time believing that this was not discussed BEFORE the call with either Trump or Pence. He is being the fall guy which is exactly why he made the call and not T or P. That and he had the "back-door" contact to Moscow. Emphasis mine. I can completely agree with your last sentence and he wouldn't be the only one, for instance, Manafort. What I still find incredulous though is the concept they, Flynn, Manfort, and other lower levels, didn't understand the laws about negotiations between private citizens and foreign officials. Remember, this didn't just happen after they had won the election and were in the transition period, but also well before during the campaign.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,500 #65 February 15, 2017 quadeI can completely agree with your last sentence and he wouldn't be the only one, for instance, Manafort. What I still find incredulous though is the concept they, Flynn, Manfort, and other lower levels, didn't understand the laws about negotiations between private citizens and foreign officials. Right, that's what happens when you don't hire any experienced diplomats and politicians and instead rely purely on iconoclasts, ideologues, cronies, industry shills and a few token ex-military guys to fill an entire administration. The problem with outright rejection of all the 'beltway insiders' is that governing is a professional skill like any other that requires knowledge, training and experience. I find it entirely plausible that there is a huge amount of law that Trump and his immediate circle are utterly oblivious to, and are too arrogant to check on with their underlings. The other option, or potentially a combination of the two, is that Flynn and the team knew it was illegal, knew the call would be recorded, but we're arrogant enough to think they had enough control to stop the contents of the call from ever being reported.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CygnusX-1 43 #66 February 15, 2017 I haven't been following this that closely. I was unaware that contact related to US policy happened any time before the transition period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #67 February 15, 2017 QuoteThe other option, or potentially a combination of the two, is that Flynn and the team knew it was illegal, knew the call would be recorded, but we're arrogant enough to think they had enough control to stop the contents of the call from ever being reported. The third (and I think the most likely) option was that this was simply a loyalty test by Trump; he has used them before. Flynn knew it was illegal, knew he _might_ get caught - but also knew that he had to pass the test or be fired immediately. So he took a calculated risk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #68 February 15, 2017 CygnusX-1I haven't been following this that closely. I was unaware that contact related to US policy happened any time before the transition period. QuoteTrump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence WASHINGTON — Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials. American law enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted the communications around the same time they were discovering evidence that Russia was trying to disrupt the presidential election by hacking into the Democratic National Committee, three of the officials said. The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election. The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation. Source and more: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0 And I'm fine with them not yet finding evidence of cooperation in hacking. However, it's still troubling because, what were they talking about?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TriGirl 319 #69 February 15, 2017 billvonQuoteThe other option, or potentially a combination of the two, is that Flynn and the team knew it was illegal, knew the call would be recorded, but we're arrogant enough to think they had enough control to stop the contents of the call from ever being reported. The third (and I think the most likely) option was that this was simply a loyalty test by Trump; he has used them before. Flynn knew it was illegal, knew he _might_ get caught - but also knew that he had to pass the test or be fired immediately. So he took a calculated risk. Or it was the other way around -- after being dismissed from DIA, he wanted to show he was still a player. Demonstrating his personal relationship with the Russian Ambassador may have seemed like a good way to show his value to a new administration (especially one so opposed by the previous administration).See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus Shut Up & Jump! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #70 February 15, 2017 Yesterday: ========= White House Press Secretary Says Trump Fired Flynn As National Security Adviser NPR February 14, 20171:42 PM ET White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Tuesday that President Trump asked for Michael Flynn's resignation on Monday night, citing an "evolving and eroding level of trust" with his national security adviser. ========= Today from Trump: ========= Michael Flynn, General Flynn is a wonderful man. I think he's been treated very, very unfairly by the media, uh, as I call it the "fake media" in many cases and, uh, I think it's really a sad thing that he was treated so badly. I think in addition to that, from intelligence, papers are being leaked, things are being leaked. It's a criminal action, criminal act. And it's been going on for a long time, before me, but now it's really going on and people are trying to cover up for a terrible loss that the Democrats had under Hillary Clinton. I think it's very very unfair what's happened to General Flynn, the way he was treated and the documents and the papers that were ILLEGALLY—I stress that—ILLEGALLY leaked. Very unfair. ========== Yeah. Trump should find out who fired Flynn ILLEGALLY and fire HIM! That would be bigly fair. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #71 February 15, 2017 TriGirl***QuoteThe other option, or potentially a combination of the two, is that Flynn and the team knew it was illegal, knew the call would be recorded, but we're arrogant enough to think they had enough control to stop the contents of the call from ever being reported. The third (and I think the most likely) option was that this was simply a loyalty test by Trump; he has used them before. Flynn knew it was illegal, knew he _might_ get caught - but also knew that he had to pass the test or be fired immediately. So he took a calculated risk. Or it was the other way around -- after being dismissed from DIA, he wanted to show he was still a player. Demonstrating his personal relationship with the Russian Ambassador may have seemed like a good way to show his value to a new administration (especially one so opposed by the previous administration). And sometimes an asshole is just an asshole.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #72 February 16, 2017 billvon Yeah. Trump should find out who fired Flynn ILLEGALLY and fire HIM! That would be bigly fair. Jake Tapper nicely sums up the contradictions and hypocrisy coming out of the administration, using their own words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA9KwljRhuQ"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,500 #73 February 16, 2017 RonD1120 That is what leaders do. They admit mistakes and correct them. Unlike his predecessor and Killary whose strategy was to cover up, obfuscate and blame someone else. Hey Ron, have you seen that Trump now claims Flynn was a great guy who was simply a victim of the unfair fake news inventing a conspiracy theory against him? I look forward to you explaining that actually what leaders do is protect their people - even when that means never admitting fault, blaming other people for their team's failures and trying to cover it all up Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #74 February 16, 2017 Funny (or maybe SAD) that the GOP thought content more important than the source of HRC's email leaks, but the exact opposite over the Flynn leaks: www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/top-republicans-probe-trump-leaks-not-contents-article-1.2973972... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #75 February 16, 2017 kallendFunny (or maybe SAD) that the GOP thought content more important than the source of HRC's email leaks, but the exact opposite over the Flynn leaks: www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/top-republicans-probe-trump-leaks-not-contents-article-1.2973972 That's like if I called the cops because I saw my neighbor beating his wife and instead they investigated me for looking through their window."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites