RussiaGate

[barbos]

Now Trump learned that to gain popularity as a leader in the USA, just bomb someone.

Yeah, I hope his approval ratings stay way up there in the thirties. If they drop into the twenties, he will probably nuke someone.

North Korea, or Rosie O'Donnell

 

[whichphilosophy]

Now Trump learned that to gain popularity as a leader in the USA, just bomb someone.

Yeah, I hope his approval ratings stay way up there in the thirties. If they drop into the twenties, he will probably nuke someone.

Then he can bomb North Korea. That'll push them up a bit. He should also use a few drones. These can hit the wrong target with immense accuracy.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Yeah, I hope his approval ratings stay way up there in the thirties. If they drop into the twenties, he will probably nuke someone.

North Korea, or Rosie O'Donnell

Ha! Funny!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

House Rep. Chaffetz says Flynn appears to have broke the law.

"There is no data to support the notion that Flynn complied with the law," Chaffetz said. "He was supposed to seek and receive permission from the secretary of state and the Army secretary both to receive that payment and engage in that kind of activity."

Rep. Chaffetz is that high rising Utah Republican House Representative who apparently rediscovered his love of his family and will be quitting soon.

Smoke began filling the room.

Short wrote that the White House would be "unable to accommodate" the committee's requests for information about Flynn's contacts with foreign nationals after he was appointed national security adviser. Short said much of that information is classified.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

House Rep. Chaffetz says Flynn appears to have broke the law.

Rep. Chaffetz is that high rising Utah Republican House Representative who apparently rediscovered his love of his family and will be quitting soon.

Smoke began filling the room.

Short wrote that the White House would be "unable to accommodate" the committee's requests for information about Flynn's contacts with foreign nationals after he was appointed national security adviser. Short said much of that information is classified.

I think the Congress ought to have some security clearance for this information. In theory, they are the ones who decide if we go to war with a country (not the President) so they shouldn't be left in the dark.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

House Rep. Chaffetz says Flynn appears to have broke the law.

Rep. Chaffetz is that high rising Utah Republican House Representative who apparently rediscovered his love of his family and will be quitting soon.

Smoke began filling the room.

I think the Congress ought to have some security clearance for this information. In theory, they are the ones who decide if we go to war with a country (not the President) so they shouldn't be left in the dark.

The one problem I see is if the military/security people use security clearances as a way of only allowing those that support them to know what's going on. Otherwise I agree--Congress and the President should have to comply with the same security rules as the rest of the people. (Yes, the President could choose to declassify something--but that would have to be explicitly done, if he simply leaked it without an official declassification he would face the same penalty as anyone else who did so.)

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I think the Congress ought to have some security clearance for this information. In theory, they are the ones who decide if we go to war with a country (not the President) so they shouldn't be left in the dark.

The one problem I see is if the military/security people use security clearances as a way of only allowing those that support them to know what's going on. Otherwise I agree--Congress and the President should have to comply with the same security rules as the rest of the people. (Yes, the President could choose to declassify something--but that would have to be explicitly done, if he simply leaked it without an official declassification he would face the same penalty as anyone else who did so.)

I guess it should be _all_ of Congress that has clearance. My point was that the President should not be able to tell Congress he has private info they can't see, "nanny nanny booboo."

 

[barbos]

I think the Congress ought to have some security clearance for this information. In theory, they are the ones who decide if we go to war with a country (not the President) so they shouldn't be left in the dark.

The one problem I see is if the military/security people use security clearances as a way of only allowing those that support them to know what's going on. Otherwise I agree--Congress and the President should have to comply with the same security rules as the rest of the people. (Yes, the President could choose to declassify something--but that would have to be explicitly done, if he simply leaked it without an official declassification he would face the same penalty as anyone else who did so.)

Yes, President would have to be sent to Ecuadorian embassy indefinitely, or maybe Russia ... indefinitely as well.

 

[bilby]

The one problem I see is if the military/security people use security clearances as a way of only allowing those that support them to know what's going on. Otherwise I agree--Congress and the President should have to comply with the same security rules as the rest of the people. (Yes, the President could choose to declassify something--but that would have to be explicitly done, if he simply leaked it without an official declassification he would face the same penalty as anyone else who did so.)

I guess it should be _all_ of Congress that has clearance. My point was that the President should not be able to tell Congress he has private info they can't see, "nanny nanny booboo."

Three men can keep a secret; as long as two of them are dead.

If all 542 elected representatives (435 voting reps, 6 non-voting reps, 100 senators, and the POTUS) have clearance for all classified information, then the US effectively doesn't have any secrets at all. It is difficult (but not impossible) for foreign intelligence agencies to find out stuff that is restricted to a dozen or fewer well vetted and highly cleared individuals, plus whoever wins election as POTUS. It would be incredibly easy for almost any nation's spies to find out anything that was known to a further 441 people, whose only 'vetting' was the ability to win a seat in the house of reps.

Whether the US should or should not have secrets is a whole other debate; But assuming that we accept for the sake of argument that she should, it seems highly inadvisable to allow elected officials to have access to such information, where a simple election can act to bypass any and all vetting and security clearances that would apply to un-elected persons with a need to know.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I guess it should be _all_ of Congress that has clearance. My point was that the President should not be able to tell Congress he has private info they can't see, "nanny nanny booboo."

Three men can keep a secret; as long as two of them are dead.

If all 542 elected representatives (435 voting reps, 6 non-voting reps, 100 senators, and the POTUS) have clearance for all classified information, then the US effectively doesn't have any secrets at all. It is difficult (but not impossible) for foreign intelligence agencies to find out stuff that is restricted to a dozen or fewer well vetted and highly cleared individuals, plus whoever wins election as POTUS. It would be incredibly easy for almost any nation's spies to find out anything that was known to a further 441 people, whose only 'vetting' was the ability to win a seat in the house of reps.

Whether the US should or should not have secrets is a whole other debate; But assuming that we accept for the sake of argument that she should, it seems highly inadvisable to allow elected officials to have access to such information, where a simple election can act to bypass any and all vetting and security clearances that would apply to un-elected persons with a need to know.

Look at the context here:

Short wrote that the White House would be "unable to accommodate" the committee's requests for information about Flynn's contacts with foreign nationals after he was appointed national security adviser. Short said much of that information is classified.

They are denying to a mere committee within Congress necessary information about contacts with Russia where our relationships with foreign entities ought to be decided by Congress.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Three men can keep a secret; as long as two of them are dead.

If all 542 elected representatives (435 voting reps, 6 non-voting reps, 100 senators, and the POTUS) have clearance for all classified information, then the US effectively doesn't have any secrets at all. It is difficult (but not impossible) for foreign intelligence agencies to find out stuff that is restricted to a dozen or fewer well vetted and highly cleared individuals, plus whoever wins election as POTUS. It would be incredibly easy for almost any nation's spies to find out anything that was known to a further 441 people, whose only 'vetting' was the ability to win a seat in the house of reps.

Whether the US should or should not have secrets is a whole other debate; But assuming that we accept for the sake of argument that she should, it seems highly inadvisable to allow elected officials to have access to such information, where a simple election can act to bypass any and all vetting and security clearances that would apply to un-elected persons with a need to know.

Look at the context here:

Short wrote that the White House would be "unable to accommodate" the committee's requests for information about Flynn's contacts with foreign nationals after he was appointed national security adviser. Short said much of that information is classified.

They are denying to a mere committee within Congress necessary information about contacts with Russia where our relationships with foreign entities ought to be decided by Congress.

There certainly is room open for certain things. Like with North Korea, certain intelligence or sabotage methods likely needs to be kept to a minimum of exposure, else the US risks blowing assets on the ground or a possible heads up to the North Koreans to look for certain cyber threats.

But, the meeting wasn't about much at all, just more sanctions. What is left to sanction?

 

[Elixir]

What is left to sanction?

Russia, according to some Dem reps.

 

[Artemus]

More dirt on Flynn.

"I honestly don't understand why the White House is covering up for Michael Flynn," Cummings said. "I don't get it, after the President fired him for lying — they should be bending over backwards to help us. It does not make any sense and it makes the American people think they have something to hide. There is a paper trail that the White House does not want our committee to follow it."

I'd agree that it's rather odd. How did so many people who already had contacts with Russia somehow end up in the Trump campaign?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

More dirt on Flynn.

"I honestly don't understand why the White House is covering up for Michael Flynn," Cummings said. "I don't get it, after the President fired him for lying — they should be bending over backwards to help us. It does not make any sense and it makes the American people think they have something to hide. There is a paper trail that the White House does not want our committee to follow it."

I'd agree that it's rather odd. How did so many people who already had contacts with Russia somehow end up in the Trump campaign?

Now, let's not jump to conclusions. We need to have an investigation that lays out everything to the public or we can't really come to any judgment that wouldn't be biased.

I mean sure, it seems odd that the Trump team had some many people with Russia ties, email releases from foreign sources were timed to diffuse Trump scandals or issues in the general election campaign, that somehow the National Security Advisor had to resign less than 30 days into the position for not "disclosing" information to the VP, and Trump's defense of Putin seemed unreal... this is all just means nothing without an incredibly and unprecedented public investigation and report.

 

[Elixir]

...this is all just means nothing without an incredibly and unprecedented public investigation and report.

Pugs aren't going to permit that. At least not until they get more help from the Russians to keep their one-party system going after 2018. I'm sure that they hope that by 2020, they will have legislated all opposition out of existence, and so will no longer need the Russians for anything except their oil.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Trump administration trying to distance themselves by giving info to the press...

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn was warned by senior members of then President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team about the risks of his contacts with the Russian ambassador weeks before the December call that led to Flynn’s forced resignation, current and former U.S. officials said.

Flynn was told during a late November meeting that Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s conversations were almost certainly being monitored by U.S. intelligence agencies, officials said, a caution that came a month before Flynn was recorded discussing U.S. sanctions against Russia with Kislyak, suggesting that the Trump administration would reevaluate the issue.

Officials were so concerned that Flynn did not fully understand the motives of the Russian ambassador that the head of Trump’s national security council transition team asked Obama administration officials for a classified CIA profile of Kislyak, officials said. The document was delivered within days, officials said, but it is not clear that Flynn ever read it.

The previously undisclosed sequence reveals the extent to which even some Trump insiders were troubled by the still-forming administration’s entanglements with Russia and enthusiasm for a friendly relationship with the Kremlin.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.db93e4ed501a

 

[Artemus]

So now the breaking news is that Obama himself told Trump of Flynn's Russian connections and Trump hired Flynn anyway. Gross incompetence or something more sinister? (If it was anyone but Trump I'd think that something else was going on, but Trump has demonstrated that he really is that stupid.)

 

[Ford]

So now the breaking news is that Obama himself told Trump of Flynn's Russian connections and Trump hired Flynn anyway. Gross incompetence or something more sinister? (If it was anyone but Trump I'd think that something else was going on, but Trump has demonstrated that he really is that stupid.)

What with Trump going out of his way to undo every single thing Obama did, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find out that he hired Flynn specifically because Obama told him not to.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

General Flynn was given the highest security clearance by the Obama Administration - but the Fake News seldom likes talking about that.

^Twitler's response.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

General Flynn was given the highest security clearance by the Obama Administration - but the Fake News seldom likes talking about that.

^Twitler's response.

And the Obama Admin took that clearance away when they fired Flynn.

And then, even after being fired, Trump gave that clearance back to Flynn, and an even more important role in the Exec Branch. Sad!