- Joined
- Apr 20, 2018
- Messages
- 10,257
- Reaction score
- 4,161
- Location
- Washington, D.C.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Mueller doesn't have ****....and RAILROADED FLYNN....trying avoid ANOTHER $MIILLION judgement for prosecutorial misconduct....(see Anthrax Debacle) is one possible perspective.
Mueller doesn't have ****....and RAILROADED FLYNN....trying avoid ANOTHER $MIILLION judgement for prosecutorial misconduct....(see Anthrax Debacle) is one possible perspective.
Mueller doesn't have ****....and RAILROADED FLYNN....trying avoid ANOTHER $MIILLION judgement for prosecutorial misconduct....(see Anthrax Debacle) is one possible perspective.
Why are any of you on about Trump in this thread?
The thread's about the implications of the content in the Flynn sentencing documents and very little there points to Trump. Sure, Flynn was closely associated with Trump, but read the two documents. There's a lot of talk about "foreign agent this and that" and little to none about political factors and objectives. Essentially the report says that Flynn lied about the nature of things he did during the campaign, but that's it.
Flynn was a former three-star general and for a man like that and what he lied about....well, nothing about his doing that makes any sense at all if all that's afoot and giving rise to those lies are federal election law violations. Sure those are serious offenses, but what about them would move Flynn, who hadn't a key campaign management role, to lie about talking to people whom he, as NSC head-to-be, would be well within his "rights" to talk? Nothing.
With regard to the campaign, Flynn was nothing more than a "crowd exciter" -- as a former general he contributes some "cool" and "tough guy" cred; he led some "lock her up" chants; he makes less emotional Republicans feel like there's at least one person in around Trump who's got proper foreign policy and government management/operations experience, etc. With regard to the transition, however, he was a key player and a key conduit to a host of nations.
So, as I asked in my OP, why and about what does a man who served in the military for over 33 years, including five years of combat duty, led the Defense Intelligence Agency, and retired as a 3-star Lieutenant General lie about having had a damn phone conversation that he knew was being recorded?
I don't know, but it strains credulity to think such a man would do so to cover-up an election law violation for which the key principal can't be prosecuted to begin with and whereof the statute of limitations would, unless he's removed from office, run out before the end of the would-be violator's term as POTUS.
There's also the fact that KT McFarland was party to the lie Flynn told and she's not even being prosecuted. That says to me that what's afoot isn't about election law conspiracy but rather about something much more disconcerting. Trump may have a role in it, but I have no way to know that.
I had decided to categorize the whole Trump gang using Batman villains in a different thread. I decided to hang "Two-face" on Flynn as it seemed most apt.
Flynn goes from a 3 Star General to a Stark Raving with the droll gathering at the corners of his mouth he was so anxious to proclaim his membership in the New Right AND cash in. This guy was so far gone that if somebody told me that in revolt he went entirely off the meds that where keeping him from chewing on his own tail, I would believe it. When you are texting your business partners that "its a go" from the steps of the Inauguration something is more than just a little screwed up in the neither reaches above the shoulders.
So I am happy Flynn appears to have found his way back to his meds or his morals or WHATEVER. Not sure I would ever trust the guy again because that was quite a metamorphosis he went through from 3 star to embarrassing himself with his "lock her up" BS. Whats to say he won't swing back again someday.
I had decided to categorize the whole Trump gang using Batman villains in a different thread. I decided to hang "Two-face" on Flynn as it seemed most apt.
Flynn goes from a 3 Star General to a Stark Raving with the droll gathering at the corners of his mouth he was so anxious to proclaim his membership in the New Right AND cash in. This guy was so far gone that if somebody told me that in revolt he went entirely off the meds that where keeping him from chewing on his own tail, I would believe it. When you are texting your business partners that "its a go" from the steps of the Inauguration something is more than just a little screwed up in the neither reaches above the shoulders.
So I am happy Flynn appears to have found his way back to his meds or his morals or WHATEVER. Not sure I would ever trust the guy again because that was quite a metamorphosis he went through from 3 star to embarrassing himself with his "lock her up" BS. Whats to say he won't swing back again someday.
I worked for him when he was that 3-Star. He has always been like that.
I worked for him when he was that 3-Star. He has always been like that.
Oh, my....
I wasn't there, but I know a few folks who worked for him when he was a Colonel.
Their basic assessment was: Flynn was an incredibly bright guy who had 10 new ideas a day.... 3 of which were good. He needed McChrystal to filter out that other 7. Once he no longer had McChrystal....."
I worked for LTG Flynn during his tenure as Director of DIA. He is a smart guy and knows his stuff but I am not optimistic about him and Trump together. Flynn has a mediocre work ethic. Since Trump hasn't been attending his security briefings I know some are hoping the people he surrounds himself with will keep him up to speed with what is most important. Flynn is the type of person to blow those things off as well. I personally had to lie on LTG Flynn's behalf one time to an Ambassador because he wanted to go watch the new Superman movie instead of attending a scheduled meeting with the Ambassador. Maybe I shouldn't have said that but we are both retired from the Army now.
Now, nothing bad happened because of that. It wasn't a matter of national security. We all mostly just thought it was funny at the time. I remember the Colonel saying, "Seriously? He is watching Superman: Man of Steel right now?" But it is typical of the disregard he has for the more tedious parts of the job. The types of things he is going to have to stay on top of because it doesn't look like Trump will. Maybe he will do better since he won't be the boss and will be answering directly to Trump. All I know is at DIA, when Flynn was the boss, it was a cluster ****. But to be fair, it was a cluster **** my entire 15 years at DIA so take that for what it is worth.
Yeah, I agree with that assessment. His personality is actually a lot like Trump’s, only Flynn is more intelligent. Here is a post I made 2 years ago when we first heard he would be the NSA.
I worked for LTG Flynn during his tenure as Director of DIA. He is a smart guy and knows his stuff but I am not optimistic about him and Trump together. Flynn has a mediocre work ethic. Since Trump hasn't been attending his security briefings I know some are hoping the people he surrounds himself with will keep him up to speed with what is most important. Flynn is the type of person to blow those things off as well. I personally had to lie on LTG Flynn's behalf one time to an Ambassador because he wanted to go watch the new Superman movie instead of attending a scheduled meeting with the Ambassador. Maybe I shouldn't have said that but we are both retired from the Army now.
Now, nothing bad happened because of that. It wasn't a matter of national security. We all mostly just thought it was funny at the time. I remember the Colonel saying, "Seriously? He is watching Superman: Man of Steel right now?" But it is typical of the disregard he has for the more tedious parts of the job. The types of things he is going to have to stay on top of because it doesn't look like Trump will. Maybe he will do better since he won't be the boss and will be answering directly to Trump. All I know is at DIA, when Flynn was the boss, it was a cluster ****. But to be fair, it was a cluster **** my entire 15 years at DIA so take that for what it is worth.
https://www.debatepolitics.com/gene...37-flynn-basically-nuts-2.html#post1066642335
Blue:
The job from which I retired, albeit in from a global management consulting firm, was similar to what I suspect a two or three star general's is: akin to an EVP in a "front of the house" capacity. For principals at that level, judgment and character are among the most important of one's qualities, so I haven't something to say about his exercise of it to take his kid to a movie. In that rarefied air, one's presumed to know when one can skip a meeting and when one cannot, regardless of what someone else, most especially one's staff, thinks of one's doing so.
I'm sure that a partner or two to whom I delegated something like attending a meeting or making a presentation in my stead thought I was being lax. Fortunately, they had better sense than to say so and they rose to the occasions and did a fine job. I had my reasons, and, yes, on occasion, the reason was so I could do something with my kid(s).
That wasn't a work-ethic thing. It was a "my kids are more important than is the firm" thing. And, if I'm honest, having the discretionary ability to thus set and live by that prioritization is one of the perqs of having senior level positions. That's as it should be because one of the "downsides" is that one typically works somehow for some share of six, if not seven, days a week, even on vacations. (I scare quoted "downside" only because some people enjoy their jobs enough that it didn't seem like work. If I could have done my job without the responsibility, which, of course, is impossible, I wouldn't have retired.)
As go your "red" assessments of Flynn, for obvious reasons, I'm fine with taking your word for them.
I worked for him when he was that 3-Star. He has always been like that.
Oh, my, guys. But just think about what we wouldn't know about 45 had he not heeded Obama's advice and warning to not appoint Flynn.
But it appears that Flynn offered prosecutors assistance in two areas.
First, Flynn contributed something to an unidentified criminal case that is not being handled by the special counsel and, thus, not directly collusion-related.
Second, Flynn seems to have answered candid questions about the Trump transition team's conversations with foreign governments after the presidential election in 2016 and before Inauguration Day. Again, this would not be relevant to "collusion" to win the election because the election was already over.
The documents filed in court Tuesday make a passing reference to the Logan Act, which prohibits private citizens from interfering in diplomatic disputes with foreign governments. But no one has ever been convicted under the act, passed in 1799. Lawyers, judges, and constitutional scholars regard the law as unconstitutional.
…
Nevertheless, this long dormant law does not apply to members of presidential transition teams who are acting not as private citizens, but as incoming government representatives of the person about to assume the presidency. They would therefore be constitutionally authorized to conduct foreign affairs.
…
There are other reasons to believe that Flynn’s "substantial assistance" to the Mueller investigation had nothing to do with "collusion" with the Russians. He was never charged with the underlying crime, whatever that is. Moreover, since Mueller is moving ahead with sentencing, he will not be using Flynn as a witness. This indicates that Flynn has nothing of significance that would be useful in any potential prosecution.
In regards to the OP, an interesting analysis by Greg Jarrett somewhat parallels it.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mue...-trump-flynn-sentencing-memo-is-a-big-nothing
Interesting.
I appreciate your sharing Jarrett's thoughts, but he's got a line flowing through the excerpt you shared: no collusion. I happen to think there's a counterintelligence thing afoot, and that necessarily means some sort of collusion is going on; the question is whether conspiracy is going on.
I don't know if you've noticed or not, but Trump has only ever said there was no collusion, yet there's no way didn't collude with Russians, and as of last Friday, we know so. Neither Trump nor his attorneys, all of whom know conspiracy is the legal standard of proof, and AFAIK, none of them have asserted there was no criminal conspiracy afoot.
The post, of course, was to note the similarity of what the document does, or does not, seem to support as to Flynn's significance, not Jarrett's talking point of no collusion. And yes, I did notice it, so my extracts intentionally avoided his discursive speculations on its meaning to Russian collusion.
What you've outlined above is basically a classic "tragic flaw" story of hubris. Okay. Such is concomitant with human nature; thus of them folks will ask "what's going on with him," but as they dispassionately reflect on the matter, most will be able to sympathize or empathize with, or at least simply understand, the protagonist. The way Flynn/Trump publicly handled the matter is, for now, totally befuddling.In bold is a Gen. McCaffrey retweet of a David Ignatius tweet with a small add of his own at the end claiming Flynn as "A superb Combat Intel Officer"
Barry R McCaffrey
@mccaffreyr3
Barry R McCaffrey Retweeted David Ignatius
Such wisdom by David Ignatius is expected with his take on LTG Mike Flynn. He totally went off the rails. Fury at being fired by Obama team. Target fixation on terror threat. Too much time in the dark world. A superb combat intel officer.Barry R McCaffrey added,
Maybe that really does explain it. McCaffrey and Ignatius paint Flynn as well suited to the role of a Combat Intel Officer that simply could not make the transition to a civilian role at the head of the large Defense Intelligence Agency in the Obama Admin. There, at DIA, Flynn apparently chased too many terrorist operations down the rabbit hole insistent that they all had their genesis in Iran. Apparently he simply was so fixated on that one aspect of what he saw as his mission, persistent in proving Iran's terrorist culpability that nothing outside that narrow tunnel was visible to him. Ultimately both superiors and subordinates just had enough and Flynn was bounced out of his job.
Now that must have really irked Flynn who I am guessing had mapped out a future cushy consultancy after his Defense Intelligence post. Seeing that plan blown to smithereens and sure that he had been unfairly judged, Flynn threw his resulting rage at all things Obama directly at Hillary's Presidential Campaign while at the same time falling in with the ultimate self absorbed, albeit often unsuccessful personal wealth generation enterprise, Donald Trump.
I put the chances that Trump did not know Flynn was talking to Kislyak about Sanctions relief during the Transition at about zero and I also rate this whole story of Flynn being fired for lying to Pence about it as a Fig Leaf designed by Flynn and Trump such that Flynn would fall on his sword leaving his post as National Security Advisor, both men hoping that would be the end of it. I believe THAT is why Trump wanted Comey to "go easy" on Flynn as the whole story of Flynn lying to Pence was just that......a story concocted by Trump and Flynn with Pence either used as a witting or unwitting participant in what was in fact a cover story, each of Trump and Flynn with his own personal financial interests fully involved in a scheme of trading US Gov Sanctions relief for Putin's help pursuing those personal financial interests and doing it while the government was still in the hands of the Obama Admin.
If all that is true Mueller knows it and has known it for over a year. Suddenly all of that redacted material in the Flynn sentencing document becomes much more interesting even just as it relates to one of the three cases identified in that sentencing document. Suddenly it becomes obvious why Mueller has had his teeth sunk into the ankle of the Trump Campaign and Admin and won't let go.
I appreciate your sharing Jarrett's thoughts, but he's got a line flowing through the excerpt you shared: no collusion. I happen to think there's a counterintelligence thing afoot, and that necessarily means some sort of collusion is going on; the question is whether conspiracy is going on.
I don't know if you've noticed or not, but Trump has only ever said there was no collusion, yet there's no way didn't collude with Russians, and as of last Friday, we know so. Neither Trump nor his attorneys, all of whom know conspiracy is the legal standard of proof, and AFAIK, none of them have asserted there was no criminal conspiracy afoot.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?