• 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!

House committee probes Russia payment to Flynn

apdst said:
Were you this concerned when Clinton was paid $35 million to sign over 22% of America's uranium deposits to Russia? Is she a traitor?
Click to expand...

Butbutbut Hillary!

Trump's the president. He's the topic. Try to stay on track.
 
Its funny this is roundly ignored, note the date: Jan 12, 2017. Obama deliberately made it easier to leak right before he left office.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/...to-share-intercepted-communications.html?_r=1

WASHINGTON — In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.
Click to expand...

This makes it much easier to damage people by leaking information that would only be under the NSA but is now shared with 16 other agencies, increasing the possibility of leaks because of the number of hands the un-redacted information will go through.

This was orchestrated. Whether Flynn is guilty of anything or not, intelligence services should not serve as a political weapon.
 
DiAnna said:
No, he wasn't serving under Obama in Dec., 2015. Flynn was Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency for 2 years under Obama, from July 2012 to August 2014:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_T._Flynn


"On April 30, 2014, Flynn announced his retirement effective later in 2014, about a year earlier than he had been scheduled to leave his position. He was reportedly effectively forced out of the DIA after clashing with superiors over his allegedly chaotic management style and vision for the agency.[27][28][29][30] In a private e-mail that was leaked online, Colin Powell said that he had heard in the DIA (apparently from later DIA director Vincent R. Stewart) that Flynn got fired because he was "abusive with staff, didn't listen, worked against policy, bad management, etc."[29] According to The New York Times, Flynn exhibited a loose relationship with facts, leading his subordinates to refer to Flynn's repeated dubious assertions as "Flynn facts".[31]"
Click to expand...
Ah. Gotcha. So he was just a 'former' Obama administration official' at that point. Good catch!
 
Mustachio said:
Great research! The only thing you missed is that in 2016 he was a keynote speaker at the Republican National Convention and was forced out of the Obama administration for being a jerk (I'm paraphrasing that). So what you got right is that he is a registered Democrat (Zell Miller was too when he spoke at the Republican National Convention). So your conclusion is that, if Flynn did anything wrong, it's Obama's fault because at one point he worked for the Obama administration? Personal accountability out the window? How very conservative minded of you!
Click to expand...
No...the conclusion was that there were a whole lot of people claiming people (presumably in THIS administration or republicans-on this site) were 'crossing their fingers' hoping nothing comes of this. My point was simply why should ANYONE be "hoping nothing comes of this"? He was indeed a democrat. He was (as Dianna pointed out) a FORMER Obama administration appointee.

And why on earth do you avoid comments from Liberals focusing instead on my comments? How very...you.
 
Grand Mal said:
Butbutbut Hillary!

Trump's the president. He's the topic. Try to stay on track.
Click to expand...
:lamo

See...now you screwed up. Mustachio is going to jump all over this and show how silly your comment is. How is 'Trump' involved in ANY of this? In fact...isnt it FAR more appropriate discussing similar allegations to the Flynn allegation regarding receiving inappropriate payments from the Russians?
 
OpportunityCost said:
Its funny this is roundly ignored, note the date: Jan 12, 2017. Obama deliberately made it easier to leak right before he left office.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/...to-share-intercepted-communications.html?_r=1



This makes it much easier to damage people by leaking information that would only be under the NSA but is now shared with 16 other agencies, increasing the possibility of leaks because of the number of hands the un-redacted information will go through.

This was orchestrated. Whether Flynn is guilty of anything or not, intelligence services should not serve as a political weapon.
Click to expand...

Actually, that was pretty smart of Obama to do that.

Cheney set the precedent for politicizing the intelligence agencies.
 
Moot said:
Actually, that was pretty smart of Obama to do that.

Cheney set the precedent for politicizing the intelligence agencies.
Click to expand...

It was smart to make it easier to leak intelligence? That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long while.
 
OpportunityCost said:
It was smart to make it easier to leak intelligence? That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long while.
Click to expand...

Maybe Obama thought that Trump likes leaks....since that's how he got elected.
 
OpportunityCost said:
It was smart to make it easier to leak intelligence? That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long while.
Click to expand...

In your considered opinion...
Are there any legitimate reasons why the NSA would want to share information with the rest of the US Intelligence community?
How hard should it be for the organizations of the US Intelligence Community to share information?
 
VanceMack said:
:lamo

See...now you screwed up. Mustachio is going to jump all over this and show how silly your comment is. How is 'Trump' involved in ANY of this? In fact...isnt it FAR more appropriate discussing similar allegations to the Flynn allegation regarding receiving inappropriate payments from the Russians?
Click to expand...

They don't want to talk about the 35 million bucks Clinton got from the Russians to give them 22% of the country's uranium deposits.

I wonder if that's something the russians would go to war ovrr. After all, it's their uranium.
 
VanceMack said:
No...the conclusion was that there were a whole lot of people claiming people (presumably in THIS administration or republicans-on this site) were 'crossing their fingers' hoping nothing comes of this. My point was simply why should ANYONE be "hoping nothing comes of this"? He was indeed a democrat. He was (as Dianna pointed out) a FORMER Obama administration appointee.

And why on earth do you avoid comments from Liberals focusing instead on my comments? How very...you.
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah, you tried to use two very misleading "facts" (but only got one right) to blame Obama and your mortal enemies. The evil, bloodsucking and, straight Flynn, THE RINGLEADERS OF THE WORLD'S MOST NEFARIOUS CHILD SEX RING!!

He's a jerk and everybody hates him. I can actually give you sources for that. You have to be an enormous jerk to have articles written about what a big jerk you are. I have no idea why he was in Obama's administration, but I'm guessing in the military there were things he did well. Communicating was not among them. Terrible hire by Trump.

But nice play posing as a victim for being called out. Let's do something crazy - let's both blame Michael Flynn if Michael Flynn did something awful all on his own.

Grand Mal said:
Butbutbut Hillary!

Trump's the president. He's the topic. Try to stay on track.
Click to expand...

It's in semi-conspiracy mode, but right now Trump is only involved if he ordered Flynn to promise to lift sanctions. Trump wouldn't ask for money in return, he'd ask for political support because he needed the dirt on Hillary to win.

Vance is right, though, Flynn's to blame for this one. He felt I should address this because he was embarrassed that people caught him lying about Flynn being part of Obama's administration at this time. I'm more than happy to point out to both sides that, in this case, neither President Trump or Obama would be at fault.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
They don't want to talk about the 35 million bucks Clinton got from the Russians to give them 22% of the country's uranium deposits.

I wonder if that's something the russians would go to war ovrr. After all, it's their uranium.
Click to expand...

Fake news.
 
Mustachio said:
Yeah, yeah, you tried to use two very misleading "facts" (but only got one right) to blame Obama and your mortal enemies. The evil, bloodsucking and, straight Flynn, THE RINGLEADERS OF THE WORLD'S MOST NEFARIOUS CHILD SEX RING!!

He's a jerk and everybody hates him. I can actually give you sources for that. You have to be an enormous jerk to have articles written about what a big jerk you are. I have no idea why he was in Obama's administration, but I'm guessing in the military there were things he did well. Communicating was not among them. Terrible hire by Trump.

But nice play posing as a victim for being called out. Let's do something crazy - let's both blame Michael Flynn if Michael Flynn did something awful all on his own.



It's in semi-conspiracy mode, but right now Trump is only involved if he ordered Flynn to promise to lift sanctions. Trump wouldn't ask for money in return, he'd ask for political support because he needed the dirt on Hillary to win.

Vance is right, though, Flynn's to blame for this one. He felt I should address this because he was embarrassed that people caught him lying about Flynn being part of Obama's administration at this time. I'm more than happy to point out to both sides that, in this case, neither President Trump or Obama would be at fault.
Click to expand...
I believe that was the point. At the end of the day there is no reason for anyone to be protecting him or fearing 'disclosure' about him.
 
apdst said:
Oh really?

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.dail...mpaign-chair-lobbies-for-russias-uranium-one/
Click to expand...

Yes, really. First of all, the company does not own any of our uranium deposits. They are contracted to process uranium and are responsible for 20% of that production. Furthermore that contract is approved by a multitude of State and Federal agencies, regulators, and an independent body of experts - not just the SOS. Russia sees none of the uranium because they don't have the required export licenses. In fact, Russia provides US with uranium. So your claims are thus relegated to fake news.
 
Napoleon said:
Yes, really. First of all, the company does not own any of our uranium deposits. They are contracted to process uranium and are responsible for 20% of that production. Furthermore that contract is approved by a multitude of State and Federal agencies, regulators, and an independent body of experts - not just the SOS. Russia sees none of the uranium because they don't have the required export licenses. In fact, Russia provides US with uranium. So your claims are thus relegated to fake news.
Click to expand...

And no link? No surprise, there. :lamo
 
I know from personal experience that Flynn was a horrible boss with a terrible work ethic. But at the time mentioned in the OP Flynn was a private citizen. As long as he didn't divulge classified information I don't think it would have broken any laws for him to accept speaking fees from Russia (unless it violated some sort of sanctions rule).
 
VanceMack said:
I believe that was the point. At the end of the day there is no reason for anyone to be protecting him or fearing 'disclosure' about him.
Click to expand...

Sure there is, but it's too early to guess what implications it has.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom