• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

After Flynn resigns, Dems ask what did Trump know and when

Communicating isn't the issue.

Making deals about lifting the sanctions on Russia is not something a person can do without being a part of the existing goverment. That's why Flynn was fired.

Communicating with leaders isn't the issue. Flynn communicated with several leaders. Russia is the only one he made deals with.

Exactly - he was unable to do it and surely the Russians would have know that. So - bottom line, no deal was made, nothing wrong was done.
 
"Reportedly" - I have not seen the illegally leaked material, have you.

Again, the chronology of his comments to the Russians - it was a joke about the inability of the DOJ or other federal agencies to get info about the Hillary emails even with subpoenas and immunity. That was after hacking had shown the DNC perverting our electoral process. Now, the envoy - what did he say? Again, I don't know - show me the leaked intel.

First you said this:

I have heard no claim of him lying to the FBI. Did you make that up?

So I graciously show you a link from Fox News about a story that the rest of us knew about but you didn't. Now you're backpedaling and saying you haven't seen illegally leaked material.

Troll elsewhere.
 
Specific to General Flynn, seems that nothing unthwart happened in his conversation with the Russians.

This from NPR.

Intelligence Official: Transcripts Of Flynn's Calls Don't Show Criminal Wrongdoing
February 15, 2017
Intelligence Official: Transcripts Of Flynn's Calls Don't Show Criminal Wrongdoing : The Two-Way : NPR
A current U.S. intelligence official tells NPR's Mary Louise Kelly that there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing in the transcripts of former national security adviser Michael Flynn's conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, although the official noted that doesn't rule out the possibility of illegal actions.

The official also says that there are recordings as well as transcripts of the calls, and that the transcripts don't suggest Flynn was acting under orders in his conversations.

Flynn resigned late Monday, after allegations that he discussed U.S. sanctions on Russia with Kislyak and then misled Vice President Pence about the nature of those conversations. Flynn initially denied discussing sanctions at all, but in his resignation Flynn said he "inadvertently" gave Pence "incomplete information" about the conversations.

NPR's Phil Ewing previously reported that it is not in dispute that Flynn spoke with Kislyak in late December. "The issue is what he said," Phil wrote.

Depending on the content of the conversations, Flynn could have violated a law called the Logan Act, which bars a private individual from conducting foreign policy without the permission of the U.S. government. For instance, if Flynn told the ambassador the Trump administration would drop the sanctions, that would have been illegal.

The intelligence official who has personally seen the transcripts told Mary Louise they contained "no evidence" of criminal wrongdoing, although the official said it can't be definitively ruled out.

The official also said there was "absolutely nothing" in the transcripts that suggests Flynn was acting under instructions "or that the trail leads higher."

"I don't think [Flynn] knew he was doing anything wrong," the official said. "Flynn talked about sanctions, but no specific promises were made. Flynn was speaking more in general 'maybe we'll take a look at this going forward' terms."

"no specific promises were made", no commitments, no undermining an existing administration or their position, no Logan Act violation.

The entire story line purported by some seems to be unraveling before everyone's eyes.

I guess it really does seem to trace back to Flynn not telling Pence what he needed to know, and letting Pence look foolish in ill-informed on nation media.
 
Hi J-M, hope all is well in your neck of the woods.

Curious and interested in your take on this. If Trump didn't fire Flynn because Flynn lied to Pence, and the press is reporting constantly that the lie was his (Flynn's) discussions with the Ambassador about sanctions, why hasn't President Trump come out and said their reporting is a lie? Because he hasn't, you know. And let's be honest - he isn't known to hold back on "getting his message out there".

I'm not sure if Trump's decision was rash. According to all reports (again, not being refuted by Trump), Trump knew for weeks, and didn't tell Pence and didn't fire Flynn.

The documents referenced in the following story were hand delivered to Russia by Trump's personal attorney:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/us/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-russia.html

Well done, Komrades. Now let's get rid of that pesky moose and squirrel.

Seriously, though, I actually agree with Trump on the Ukraine. It was part of Russia until Nikita Kruschev, a Ukranian himself, split it off into a semi autonomous SSR. Putin is taking it back. This is a Russian internal affair and none of our business. So I side with Trump on this one.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, though, I actually agree with Trump on the Ukraine. It was part of Russia until Kruschev, and Ukranian himself, split it off into a semi autonomous SSR. Putin is taking it back. This is a Russian internal affair and none of our business. So I side with Trump on this one.
The Presidium of the Supreme Soviet transferred Crimea to Ukraine. Crimea has been Ukrainian territory for 60 years.

The document signed by Yeltsin (Belavezha Accord) at the dissolution of the USSR stipulated that the sovereign borders of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus would remain as they existed at the signing.

Since 1998 (via a mutual treaty), Moscow has been paying Ukraine rent to lease the Black Sea Fleet facility at Sevastopol, Crimea.
 
The documents referenced in the following story were hand delivered to Russia by Trump's personal attorney:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/us/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-russia.html

Well done, Komrades. Now let's get rid of that pesky moose and squirrel.

Seriously, though, I actually agree with Trump on the Ukraine. It was part of Russia until Nikita Kruschev, a Ukranian himself, split it off into a semi autonomous SSR. Putin is taking it back. This is a Russian internal affair and none of our business. So I side with Trump on this one.

The NYTimes sure has a vivid imagination don't they....Reading that article reading that article felt like I was reading a dime store spy novel....Come back when they prove all of this....
 
According to the President he did do something wrong, in that he told the VP one thing, and the President another....So, yeah....

It's not that he told Trump and Pence two different things, it's that he did the things in the first place.
 
It's not that he told Trump and Pence two different things, it's that he did the things in the first place.

Maybe for you, but I assure you that no law's were broken, and according to a statement by the President himself, it is how I described it....But, I understand that you won't accept that....
 
Maybe for you, but I assure you that no law's were broken,

Well, your anonymous internet-based assurance is not enough for me. If Flynn was discussing sanctions with the Russian Ambassador before the inauguration, then that is illegal. Private citizens cannot negotiate with foreign powers when it comes to government policy like sanctions. Why else would the Russian Ambassador call Flynn? It's not like the two were squash partners. And if they were, then that should raise some serious red flags given Russia's overt use of hacking and subterfuge.


according to a statement by the President himself

Trump is clueless and has no idea what is happening in his administration. He is sheltered, coddled, and babied and is not being held accountable for anything he says or does. He craves adulation and praise, and cannot handle criticism.
 
Well, your anonymous internet-based assurance is not enough for me.

:lol: Fair enough...

If Flynn was discussing sanctions with the Russian Ambassador before the inauguration, then that is illegal. Private citizens cannot negotiate with foreign powers when it comes to government policy like sanctions.

And that is just the thing here Incisor....You don't know what they talked about, and I don't know either...But, if you are really going to hang your hat on a 200 + year old law, that has NEVER been prosecuted, then more power to you, but I seriously doubt that it this will be the first....

Why else would the Russian Ambassador call Flynn? It's not like the two were squash partners. And if they were, then that should raise some serious red flags given Russia's overt use of hacking and subterfuge.

So, you've set up a 'catch 22' vision when viewing this Presidency....Not very fair now is it?

Trump is clueless and has no idea what is happening in his administration. He is sheltered, coddled, and babied and is not being held accountable for anything he says or does. He craves adulation and praise, and cannot handle criticism.

Well, I think you are letting your dislike of his winning the election get in the way of you fairly assessing what he does or does not think and do...
 
And that is just the thing here Incisor....You don't know what they talked about, and I don't know either...But, if you are really going to hang your hat on a 200 + year old law, that has NEVER been prosecuted, then more power to you, but I seriously doubt that it this will be the first.

You guys hang your hats on a 200+ year old law (2nd Amendment), so....

The problem is that Flynn had contact with this Russian Ambassador in the first place, and the mixed messaging from Trump, Pence, Flynn, and the GOP seems to be an effort to muddy and confuse the issue so it gets to the point where it's so convoluted about who said what to whom, that fatigue sets in. That's the strategy here. Trump and Conservatives hope they can sow enough doubt and confusion that the public gets fatigue and no one gets held accountable. To hear Trump say he didn't think there was anything wrong with Flynn discussing sanctions with the Russians speaks against his fitness for office and his understanding of the powers of the Executive Branch.



So, you've set up a 'catch 22' vision when viewing this Presidency....Not very fair now is it?

I didn't set that up, Trump and Flynn did. I'm pointing it out. You can form whatever conclusion you want from it, but the fact remains that Flynn had inappropriate conversations with Russia and either lied to Pence and Trump, or they're all lying to us. If it's the former, then that really speaks to Trump's poor judgment when it comes to picking his cabinet and advisors. If it's the latter, welllllllllll...


Well, I think you are letting your dislike of his winning the election get in the way of you fairly assessing what he does or does not think and do...

Of course I dislike Trump winning by losing, but that's beside the point. How Trump won has no bearing for me on how he governs. And so far, his governance has been poor at best.
 
You guys hang your hats on a 200+ year old law

Surely you see the difference between a right, and a law right? I mean come on.....:roll:

The problem is that Flynn had contact with this Russian Ambassador in the first place...

No, that isn't a problem at all...

and the mixed messaging from Trump, Pence, Flynn, and the GOP seems to be an effort to muddy and confuse the issue so it gets to the point where it's so convoluted about who said what to whom, that fatigue sets in.

Way to project there my friend....That seems to be the liberal/progressive tactic, which is to say that they believe that the more they complain about every little thing, the more chance something will stick....Y'all ought to just take a chill for a bit....

Trump and Conservatives hope they can sow enough doubt and confusion that the public gets fatigue and no one gets held accountable.

Accountability is fine, and I think everyone would like to see more of it in Washington...Funny how that is a new purpose for the democrats, but with that said, it's fine to hold our politicians accountable, just make sure that your cries of accountability are warranted, otherwise you are just the boy crying wolf.....

To hear Trump say he didn't think there was anything wrong with Flynn discussing sanctions with the Russians speaks against his fitness for office and his understanding of the powers of the Executive Branch.

Hmmm...Is that what he said? You sure? Maybe go back and re read the transcript.....

I didn't set that up...

Sure you did...Now you want to make us believe that you didn't say what you said....

Trump and Flynn did. I'm pointing it out.

This is silly, but entertaining...lol

You can form whatever conclusion you want from it...

Thanks for your permission...Not that I need it....:mrgreen:

but the fact remains that Flynn had inappropriate conversations with Russia

No, that is NOT a fact at all....And that you are trying so hard to just deem it so, shows how intellectually dishonest your argument is, at this point.

either lied to Pence and Trump, or they're all lying to us.

Not at all, but it was troubling that General Flynn told the VP one thing, then when questioned about it by the President he told the President that he couldn't recall, and at that point the President felt he had lost confidence in the General, and asked for his resignation....Simple as that...It is you whom are contorting yourself in to a pretzel trying to make it something it's not....

If it's the former, then that really speaks to Trump's poor judgment when it comes to picking his cabinet and advisors. If it's the latter, welllllllllll...

*Sigh Nothing he does is going to be satisfactory to you so why bother?

Of course I dislike Trump winning by losing...

Don't like how we elect Presidents? Move.

but that's beside the point.

Don't let that stop the cheap shots....Democrats are great at that....

How Trump won has no bearing for me on how he governs.

Sure seems to stick in your craw....

And so far, his governance has been poor at best.

Only way, from what I read of you, that you would be satisfied with anything Trump does, would be if he were to resign, and that is not going to happen....
 
Back
Top Bottom