sierratr

The negative and incessant drumbeat emanating from the democrats, the media, and Hollywood that is determined to destroy Trump's presidency before it can find its footing is, unfortunately, gaining strength. To blunt the onslaught and regain momentum, Trump must immediately focus on and pass a tax plan that offers substantial income benefits to the middle class. Putting more money in the average family's pocket will dramatically derail the euphoria the Left is currently feeling. Add the tax cuts for business that will create more jobs and the Trumpster will again trump his nattering nabobs of negatism. This must be a higher priority than the wall or immigration reform.

jer48 Loc: perris ca

he is in no danger of loosing his presidency just my opinion

EL Loc: Massachusetts

I don't think he's in any danger of losing his job either. The majority of the people want him to do just what he's doing. That's why they elected him. Hollywood people are just messed up because there'll probably be no more big parties at the White House for them.

the waker Loc: 11th freest nation

Hollywood people 😄

This is the only country in history that has cared about the political opinion of theyre court jester's.
They need to stick to they're pretend world.

CounterRevolutionary

So, who wiretapped General Flynn's phone call with the Russian Ambassador? Who wiretaps all American phone calls: the National Security Agency? Do you suppose one of NSA's disgruntled employees during the p**********l t***sition spied on Flynn, their prospective new boss? Hmmm. How many more Anthony Snowdens are lurking in the NSA?

No wonder why the Republicans are calling for an investigation.

robmull Loc: florida

Absolutely NOT, sierratr. ABSOLUTELY NOT. As a matter of fact, the "lap-(D)og, alphabet channel" media forecasting Hillary with an 82% assurity, over "THE DONALD'S" 12% "possibility of a snowball in hell," is EXACTLY what is happening with their post-e******n futile attempts to get a "(D)O-OVER." FAT CHANCE!!! "Liberalism," is (D)emanding that President stop "MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN," and completely (R)uining their chance for "fundamentally t***sforming" our "Shining Light on the Hill." Every time the radical Marx/Alinskyites figure another angle to impune, (D)eligitimize or Impeach President Trump (R), President Trump is (R)ounding the next turn!!! GOOOOOOOOOOOO PRESIDENT "45" DONALD J. TRUMP (R)!!!

moldyoldy

They wiretapped the Russians, Flynn should have known that. Trump and his people were told long ago and did nothing. Trump has lots of people with Russian ties.

https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemocrats/videos/1427387490687634/

Big Bass

T***p w*n. Fairly and squarely. He won't lose the presidency, unless it's due to ill-health. (Unlike corrupt hellary.) As far as Hollywood and retail businesses are concerned, I for one, am not supporting any business that uses these childish tactics. I am shunning TV channels that broadcast l*****t propaganda and movies with these ridiculously left-wing stars. In my view, they are obsolete and irrelevant. I'm not alone.
As Trump becomes more popular, and he will, more people will do the same. Many businesses will simply go out of business. Trump is nobody's fool. That is why he is so wealthy.

robmull Loc: florida

Every time radical Marx/Alinsky "liberalism" think they have another methods of impuning, (D)elegitimizing or Impeaching President "45" Trump to get a "DO-OVER," moldymoldy, President Trump (R), is already 'rounding the next turn with 8 more "obamanations" in his wake!!! "Fundamental t***sformation" (D), is looking mighty electively (D)ecapitated currently, and the mindless body and tail (D), of the beheaded "(D)ragon" are reflexively wandering aimlessly around our "Shining Light on the Hill," attempting to do a merger with ISIS, and (D)o the usual radical "scorched-earth" attempt to "o*******w the enemy, America" {"red-D)iaper baby," Saul Alinsky, "Rules for Radicals"}. Hummmmm. FAT CHANCE!!! By the time the radical (D) "movement" catches up-to where President Trump (R) WAS, he's already around the next turn, throwing-out and cancelling one "obamanation" after the next!!! GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PRESIDENT "45" DONALD J. TRUMP (R)!!!

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

It would help if Trump would stop doing/saying stupid stuff, stop running a campaign and try running the country, hire some people who actually know some s**t - and stop trying to get everyone to lick his ass.

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

What we see in the media is disturbing for sure , but practically bought and paid for and not organic ,, it will get worse before it gets better but we expected the left to go loony tunes psycho and they have .. We must find ways to help Trump but not lose sight on agenda and the tax cut is one of many ..

moldyoldy

The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said.
The message, delivered by Sally Q. Yates and a senior career national security official to the White House counsel, was prompted by concerns that ­Flynn, when asked about his calls and texts with the ­Russian diplomat, had told Vice ­President-elect Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the 2016 e******n, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the ­information.
Flynn resigned Monday night in the wake of revelations about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.

In the waning days of the Obama administration, James R. Clapper Jr., who was the director of national intelligence, and John Brennan, the CIA director at the time, shared Yates’s concerns and concurred with her recommendation to inform the Trump White House. They feared that “Flynn had put himself in a compromising position” and thought that Pence had a right to know that he had been misled, according to one of the officials, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

A senior Trump administration official said before Flynn’s resignation that the White House was aware of the matter, adding that “we’ve been working on this for weeks.”
The current and former officials said that although they believed that Pence was misled about the contents of Flynn’s communications with the Russian ambassador, they couldn’t rule out that Flynn was acting with the knowledge of others in the t***sition.
The FBI, Yates, Clapper and Brennan declined to comment on the matter.

In a Feb. 8 interview with The Washington Post, Flynn categorically denied discussing sanctions with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, repeating public assertions made in January by top Trump officials. One day after the interview, Flynn revised his account, telling The Post through a spokesman that he “couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.”
Two officials said a main topic of the relevant call was the sanctions. Officials also said there was no evidence that Russia had attempted to exploit the discrepancy between public statements by Trump officials and what ­Flynn had discussed.
[National security adviser Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador]
Flynn told The Post earlier this month that he first met Kislyak in 2013, when Flynn was director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and made a trip to Moscow.

U.S. intelligence reports during the 2016 p**********l campaign showed that Kislyak was in touch with Flynn, officials said. Communications between the two continued after Trump’s victory on Nov. 8, according to officials with access to intelligence reports on the matter.
Kislyak, in a brief interview with The Post, confirmed having contacts with Flynn before and after the e******n, but he declined to say what was discussed.
For Yates and other officials, concerns about the communications peaked in the days after the Obama administration on Dec. 29 announced measures to punish Russia for what it said was the Kremlin’s interference in the e******n in an attempt to help Trump.
After the sanctions were rolled out, the Obama administration braced itself for the Russian retaliation. To the surprise of many U.S. officials, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on Dec. 30 that there would be no response. Trump praised the decision on Twitter.
Intelligence analysts began to search for clues that could help explain Putin’s move. The search turned up Kislyak’s communications, which the FBI routinely monitors, and the phone call in question with Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general with years of intelligence experience.
[The fall of Michael Flynn: A timeline]
From that call and subsequent intercepts, FBI agents wrote a secret report summarizing ­Flynn’s discussions with Kislyak.
Yates, then the deputy attorney general, considered Flynn’s comments in the intercepted call to be “highly significant” and “potentially illegal,” according to an official familiar with her thinking.

Yates and other intelligence officials suspected that Flynn could be in violation of an obscure U.S. statute known as the Logan Act, which bars U.S. citizens from interfering in diplomatic disputes with another country.
At the same time, Yates and other law enforcement officials knew there was little chance of bringing against Flynn a case related to the Logan Act, a statute that has never been used in a prosecution. In addition to the legal and political hurdles, Yates and other officials were aware of an FBI investigation looking at possible contacts between Trump associates and Russia, which now included the Flynn-Kislyak communications.
Word of the calls leaked out on Jan. 12 in an op-ed by Post columnist David Ignatius. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut U.S. sanctions?” Ignatius wrote, citing the Logan Act.
The next day, a Trump t***sition official told The Post, “I can tell you that during his call, sanctions were not discussed whatsoever.”
White House press secretary Sean Spicer, in a conference call with reporters on Jan. 13, said that the conversation between Flynn and Kislyak had “centered on the logistics” of a post-inauguration call between Trump and Putin. “That was it, plain and simple,” Spicer added.
On Jan. 15, Pence was asked about the phone call during an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Citing a conversation he had with Flynn, Pence said the incoming national security adviser and Kislyak “did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia.”
Before the Pence statement on Jan. 15, top Justice Department and intelligence officials had discussed whether the incoming Trump White House should be notified about the contents of the Flynn-Kislyak communications.
Pence’s statement on CBS made the issue more urgent, current and former officials said, because U.S. intelligence agencies had reason to believe that Russia was aware that Flynn and Kislyak had discussed sanctions in their December call, contrary to public statements.
U.S. intelligence reports during the 2016 p**********l campaign showed that Kislyak was in touch with Flynn, officials said. Communications between the two continued after Trump’s victory on Nov. 8, according to officials with access to intelligence reports on the matter.
Kislyak, in a brief interview with The Post, confirmed having contacts with Flynn before and after the e******n, but he declined to say what was discussed.
For Yates and other officials, concerns about the communications peaked in the days after the Obama administration on Dec. 29 announced measures to punish Russia for what it said was the Kremlin’s interference in the e******n in an attempt to help Trump.
After the sanctions were rolled out, the Obama administration braced itself for the Russian retaliation. To the surprise of many U.S. officials, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on Dec. 30 that there would be no response. Trump praised the decision on Twitter.
Intelligence analysts began to search for clues that could help explain Putin’s move. The search turned up Kislyak’s communications, which the FBI routinely monitors, and the phone call in question with Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general with years of intelligence experience.
[The fall of Michael Flynn: A timeline]
From that call and subsequent intercepts, FBI agents wrote a secret report summarizing ­Flynn’s discussions with Kislyak.
Yates, then the deputy attorney general, considered Flynn’s comments in the intercepted call to be “highly significant” and “potentially illegal,” according to an official familiar with her thinking.

Yates and other intelligence officials suspected that Flynn could be in violation of an obscure U.S. statute known as the Logan Act, which bars U.S. citizens from interfering in diplomatic disputes with another country.
At the same time, Yates and other law enforcement officials knew there was little chance of bringing against Flynn a case related to the Logan Act, a statute that has never been used in a prosecution. In addition to the legal and political hurdles, Yates and other officials were aware of an FBI investigation looking at possible contacts between Trump associates and Russia, which now included the Flynn-Kislyak communications.
Word of the calls leaked out on Jan. 12 in an op-ed by Post columnist David Ignatius. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut U.S. sanctions?” Ignatius wrote, citing the Logan Act.
The next day, a Trump t***sition official told The Post, “I can tell you that during his call, sanctions were not discussed whatsoever.”
White House press secretary Sean Spicer, in a conference call with reporters on Jan. 13, said that the conversation between Flynn and Kislyak had “centered on the logistics” of a post-inauguration call between Trump and Putin. “That was it, plain and simple,” Spicer added.
On Jan. 15, Pence was asked about the phone call during an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Citing a conversation he had with Flynn, Pence said the incoming national security adviser and Kislyak “did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia.”
Before the Pence statement on Jan. 15, top Justice Department and intelligence officials had discussed whether the incoming Trump White House should be notified about the contents of the Flynn-Kislyak communications.
Pence’s statement on CBS made the issue more urgent, current and former officials said, because U.S. intelligence agencies had reason to believe that Russia was aware that Flynn and Kislyak had discussed sanctions in their December call, contrary to public statements.
U.S. intelligence reports during the 2016 p**********l campaign showed that Kislyak was in touch with Flynn, officials said. Communications between the two continued after Trump’s victory on Nov. 8, according to officials with access to intelligence reports on the matter.
Kislyak, in a brief interview with The Post, confirmed having contacts with Flynn before and after the e******n, but he declined to say what was discussed.
For Yates and other officials, concerns about the communications peaked in the days after the Obama administration on Dec. 29 announced measures to punish Russia for what it said was the Kremlin’s interference in the e******n in an attempt to help Trump.
After the sanctions were rolled out, the Obama administration braced itself for the Russian retaliation. To the surprise of many U.S. officials, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on Dec. 30 that there would be no response. Trump praised the decision on Twitter.
Intelligence analysts began to search for clues that could help explain Putin’s move. The search turned up Kislyak’s communications, which the FBI routinely monitors, and the phone call in question with Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general with years of intelligence experience.
[The fall of Michael Flynn: A timeline]
From that call and subsequent intercepts, FBI agents wrote a secret report summarizing ­Flynn’s discussions with Kislyak.
Yates, then the deputy attorney general, considered Flynn’s comments in the intercepted call to be “highly significant” and “potentially illegal,” according to an official familiar with her thinking.

Yates and other intelligence officials suspected that Flynn could be in violation of an obscure U.S. statute known as the Logan Act, which bars U.S. citizens from interfering in diplomatic disputes with another country.
At the same time, Yates and other law enforcement officials knew there was little chance of bringing against Flynn a case related to the Logan Act, a statute that has never been used in a prosecution. In addition to the legal and political hurdles, Yates and other officials were aware of an FBI investigation looking at possible contacts between Trump associates and Russia, which now included the Flynn-Kislyak communications.
Word of the calls leaked out on Jan. 12 in an op-ed by Post columnist David Ignatius. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut U.S. sanctions?” Ignatius wrote, citing the Logan Act.
The next day, a Trump t***sition official told The Post, “I can tell you that during his call, sanctions were not discussed whatsoever.”
White House press secretary Sean Spicer, in a conference call with reporters on Jan. 13, said that the conversation between Flynn and Kislyak had “centered on the logistics” of a post-inauguration call between Trump and Putin. “That was it, plain and simple,” Spicer added.
On Jan. 15, Pence was asked about the phone call during an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Citing a conversation he had with Flynn, Pence said the incoming national security adviser and Kislyak “did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia.”
Before the Pence statement on Jan. 15, top Justice Department and intelligence officials had discussed whether the incoming Trump White House should be notified about the contents of the Flynn-Kislyak communications.
Pence’s statement on CBS made the issue more urgent, current and former officials said, because U.S. intelligence agencies had reason to believe that Russia was aware that Flynn and Kislyak had discussed sanctions in their December call, contrary to public statements.
The internal debate over how to handle the intelligence on Flynn and Kislyak came to a head on Jan. 19, Obama’s last full day in office.
Yates, Clapper and Brennan argued for briefing the incoming administration so the new president could decide how to deal with the matter. The officials discussed options, including telling Pence, the incoming White House counsel, the incoming chief of staff or Trump himself.
FBI Director James B. Comey initially opposed notification, citing concerns that it could complicate the agency’s ­investigation.
Clapper and Brennan left their positions when Trump was sworn in, but Yates stayed on as acting attorney general until Jan. 30, when Trump fired her for refusing to defend his executive order temporarily barring refugees and people from seven majority-Muslim countries — an action that had been challenged in court.

moldyoldy

A turning point came after Jan. 23, when Spicer, in his first official media briefing, again was asked about Flynn’s communications with Kislyak. Spicer said that he had talked to Flynn about the issue “again last night.” There was just “one call,” Spicer said. And it covered four subjects: a plane crash that claimed the lives of a Russian military choir; Christmas greetings; Russian-led talks over the Syrian civil war; and the logistics of setting up a call between Putin and Trump. Spicer said that was the extent of the conversation.
Yates again raised the issue with Comey, who now backed away from his opposition to informing the White House. Yates and the senior career national security official spoke to McGahn, the White House counsel, who didn’t respond Monday to a request for comment.
Trump declined to publicly back his national security adviser after the news broke.
On Monday afternoon, Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, said Trump had “full confidence” in Flynn. Minutes later, however, Spicer delivered a contradictory statement to ­reporters.
“The president is evaluating the situation,” Spicer’s statement read. “He’s speaking to Vice President Pence relative to the conversation the vice president had with Gen. Flynn and also speaking to various other people about what he considers the single most important subject there is: Our national security.”

And then late Monday, Flynn resigned.

Karen DeYoung and Greg Miller contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/justice-department-warned-white-house-that-flynn-could-be-vulnerable-to-russian-blackmail-officials-say/2017/02/13/fc5dab88-f228-11e6-8d72-263470bf0401_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_flynn-0818pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.74dbc5bd1697

sierratr

The cogent question that must be asked is WHO IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION LEAKED THE INFORMATION. THIS COULD BE A TREASONOUS ACT. Was it the last Obama attorney general ( the question mark on my laptop does not work}.

snowbear37 Loc: MA.

It's hard to remember the objective was to drain the swamp when you're up to your ass in alligators.