Out Like Flynn!
POSTED BY: ElvisChrist
UPDATED: Sunday, December 13, 2020 05:41
VIEWED: 12259
PAGE 11 of 13
Quote:Said the deep state troll.
I said deep state is a fantasy.- THUGR
How funny!
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes, I watched. Someone Trump wanted to hire to replace Flynn also watched, which was too bad for Trump -- his presser convinced Robert Harward to bow out.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECOND< THANK YOU for posting the link.
I listened to the entire press conference. and if there was anything in it that I disagreed with, I don't remember what it was . . .
Did you even listen to this yourself?
Harward, the widely respected retired vice admiral who declined the Trump administration's offer, did so, according to a source, after the White House could not satisfy his conditions and after watching President Trump's press conference Thursday.
www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/exclusive-trump-presser-convinced-nsc-candi
date-harward-to-decline-879994947802
Unlike Signym, Harward did not go point by point, agreeing or disagreeing with Trump's answers and commentaries, but Seth Meyers very helpfully did.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And I listened to this joker, and yanno what? Everything he said was a bunch of bullshit. The interview was NOT "batshit crazy". Trump has answered the question about "contacts with Russia" multiple times, including calling it a "scam" ... how much clearer can Trump get? How many times is he supposed to answer the same question, which - a this point- has devolved into "badgering" and "propaganda".
Why are you getting your opinions from comedians who do nothing but try to destroy a person? I guess you never got over junior high.
You must be allergic to discussing important topics.
=====
Now, I went online to find out why Harward turned down the National Security Advisor position, and it was not because the Trump presser was "batshit crazy" or any such bullshit as you insinuate.
It was, as I thought, a chain of command issue: Although Flynn was a Trump supporter, and didn't do anything wrong, he still had to resign because he hadn't fully reported to Pence. So, what is the reporting structure?
Quote:
MSNBC host Chris Hayes on Friday cited a former national security official familiar with Harward's decision who said Harward asked that several demands be met as a condition of accepting the offer:
1) A clear chain of command, reporting directly to the president.
2) Restoring the [National Security Council] structure of prior administrations ... so that political advisers like Steve Bannon would not have a seat on the Principals' Committee.
"Harward wanted to undo the fairly large changes the president had made to the NSC that had inserted Bannon into the process," Hayes reported.
Citing his source, Hayes said "The White House did not offer Harward sufficient assurances that he would have such autonomy." Harward wrote a letter declining the offer.
http://www.businessinsider.com/national-security-adviser-trump-robert-
harward-declined-after-press-conference-2017-2
======
As you know, or SHOULD know by now, I never was a 100% Trump supporter. My vote was driven by the fact that the alternative was worse. Hillary Clinton was a deep state, globalist candidate, who received a lot of contributions from, and had many contacts with Saudi Arabia. Who did not have America's interests at heart.
Your reaction, SECOND, is that you're repelled by "loudmouth Texas businessmen". But in backing away from Trump, be aware of what corner that you've backing into. I would hope that you would consider which side you wind up being on with a little more seriousness.
One of the best interviews on the media and the deep state that I've heard lately
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:According to Trump:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Pity . . .
Trump did not direct Flynn to call Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and talk about sanctions, so there is no wrongdoing on Trump’s part.
But there was also nothing wrong with Flynn’s decision to call Kislyak and talk about sanctions, so there is no wrongdoing on Flynn’s part.
Flynn got fired not due to underlying misconduct, but because he told Vice President Pence he hadn’t discussed sanctions with Kislyak.
There are a bunch of different puzzling aspects to this.
First among them is the timing. Flynn wasn’t fired when Trump was told that Flynn had lied to Pence. Nor was Flynn fired when Pence found out that Flynn had lied to Pence. Rather, Flynn was fired a few hours after the Washington Post told the public that Trump had been told weeks earlier that Flynn had lied to Pence.
The second is the question of why Flynn would have misled Pence about this if there was nothing wrong with what he did. Normally people don’t lie to their colleagues for no reason.
Last but by no means least: If, as Trump says, he would have directed Flynn to discuss sanctions with Kislyak, why was it that the administration spent weeks insisting that there had been no such discussion? Trump’s position seems to be that his team believed Flynn had been doing the wrong thing (not talking to Kislyak about sanctions) but then it turned out that in fact Flynn had done the right thing (talking to Kislyak about sanctions), but the revelation that Flynn had done the right thing caused him to be fired because Flynn had falsely told them he’d done the wrong thing.
That’s crazy. Especially in an administration that is not exactly known for placing a high premium on strict factual accuracy, that can’t possibly be the reason Flynn was cashiered.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
According to all of the reports that I read, the "conversation" about sanctions went something like this:
CONVERSATION
Russian Ambassador: We are concerned about upcoming sanctions
Flynn: When Trump is is office, he'll review all policies
THE END
You're as bad as THUGR. Your mind has been infested with this whole BUT PUTIN! meme
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Flynn claimed his conversation with Russia in December was "not to relieve sanctions. It was basically to say, 'Look, we're coming into office in a couple of weeks. Give us some time to take a look at everything,'" he said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/national-securi
ty-adviser-flynn-discussed-sanctions-with-russian-ambassador-despite-denials-officials-say/2017/02/09/f85b29d6-ee11-11e6-b4ff-ac2cf509efe5_story.html?utm_term=.4960e6d4a3be
Quote:
Several officials emphasized that while sanctions were discussed, they did not see evidence that Flynn had an intent to convey an explicit promise to take action after the inauguration.
This helps explain why 'officials' were so happy to anonymously discuss classified intel with wapo. As wapo further reports in the same story:
Quote:But it turns out the story about Russia hacking the election was FAKE NEWS promoted by Hillary, the DNC, the Obama administration, and the CIA, to try and smear Trump and throw the election. http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61385&mid=1
Flynn’s contacts with the ambassador attracted attention within the Obama administration because of the timing. U.S. intelligence agencies were then concluding that Russia had waged a cyber campaign designed in part to help elect Trump; his senior adviser on national security matters was discussing the potential consequences for Moscow, officials said. ...
024319#1024319
wapo continued:
Quote:Other stories I've linked elsewhere said that the officials asked to remain anonymous because THEY WERE DIVULGING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION.
Nine current and former officials, who were in senior positions at multiple agencies at the time of the calls, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.
Quote:Except there WAS no 'Russian assault on the U.S. election'. In effect, those officials were simply throwing more allegations out there in order to back up previous allegations - which have already been dismissed as invalid by DNI.
All of those officials said Flynn’s references to the election-related sanctions were explicit. Two of those officials went further, saying that Flynn urged Russia not to overreact to the penalties being imposed by President Barack Obama, making clear that the two sides would be in position to review the matter after Trump was sworn in as president. “Kislyak was left with the impression that the sanctions would be revisited at a later time,” said a former official. A third official put it more bluntly, saying that either Flynn had misled Pence or that Pence misspoke. An administration official stressed that Pence made his comments based on his conversation with Flynn. The sanctions in question have so far remained in place.
... Those officials were already alarmed by what they saw as a Russian assault on the U.S. election.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Has some new news popped up that changed anything?
There seemed to be a big "Trumps Being Ousted" party a few days ago and now there are just crickets.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh - if there was a party here, I missed it. I only show up now and again.
I agree with Signy though - the CIA, State Department, and the deep state are doing all they can to delegitimize Trump with the cooperation of some media. And I can imagine all level of fabricated story, 'classified' leak, media-deepstate collusion - whatever it takes - to do that.
Also, I'm assuming at the moment that that will all continue. The deep-state/ CIA/ State Department/ media nexus has been acting like this is an existential fight.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Me too, I just came by to post the thing about Firefly being re-instated. And there was a bunch of politics here. I tripped over it, and fell face down into a poodle. Puddle. Rain Drop Face Swap.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's been years since I was all conspiracy theorist crazy. Those days are behind me now. I really don't care all that much. Life seemed a whole lot longer when I was 22 years old, and I'm not all that interesting or important, so I don't feel as though I have a bullseye on my back.
That being said, I think it's foolish for anyone to believe there isn't a "Deep State" in any government. I'm not going to go so far as to make like Bugs Bunny and say "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em", but there really is no fighting it. They have all of the money and the power and they can hide in plain sight.
We are free enough to go about our lives as we please. We'll never know "real" power, but who wants that anyway?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME