Slashdot Mirror
Michael Flynn Resigns As Trump's National Security Adviser (go.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ABC News: President Donald Trump's embattled national security adviser Michael Flynn, who faced questions about a call to the Russian ambassador prior to the inauguration, has resigned. Retired Army General Keith Kellogg was named acting national security adviser to replace Flynn. ABC News reported Monday that Flynn called Vice President Mike Pence on Friday to apologize for misleading him about his conversation with the ambassador in November. Flynn previously denied that he spoke about sanctions the U.S. imposed on Russia for its suspected interference in the 2016 election, a claim repeated by Pence in January. An administration official later claimed Pence was relying on information provided to him by Flynn. In his resignation later, Flynn cited the "fast pace of events" for "inadvertently" briefing "the Vice President Elect and others with incomplete information regarding [his] phone calls with the Russian Ambassador." You can view Flynn's full resignation letter, as provided by the White House, here.
Right?! This was just because of a miscommunication of a phone call, that's all. *waves hand*
Is everybody tired of winning yet?
General Michael Flynn's tenure as NSA adviser is the shortest in US history (24 days). The previous record-holder was 348 days (Reagan's first NSA director). And I guarantee that Reagan's NSA director didn't resign because he was too cozy with and taking money from the Russians.
So much for "extreme vetting", I guess.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Slashdot customer service here. I'm sorry you're having difficulty with the site. OK, I am happy to help:
Donald Trump is technically a puppet of the Kremlin.
Are you satisfied now? Do you think you can answer a short survey to help us maintain this dedication to our customers?
You are welcome on my lawn.
You might want to google "Spiro Agnew".
You are welcome on my lawn.
Nerds care about politics when it's this fucked up. Therefore political news is nerd news.
You could try repeating facts, or, you know, come up with more Fake News like him being "paid by the Russians".
Flynn Was Paid By Russia for 2015 Trip
Trump adviser Michael T. Flynn on his dinner with Putin
But don't let facts get in the way of calling everything "Fake News."
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
And it's far worse. He had conversations BEFORE he was appointed by Trump. The Russian Ambassador KNEW he would be appointed.
Remember Trump's "only I know who will be my choices"?? comment? Well no, Putin and the Russians had an in too.
And the timing of those calls, matched up with the stated timings in the pee memos. Giving further credence to the pee memos.
The pee memos, list Putin's courting of Flynn back in August, way before the election. So Putin picked this man back in August way before Trump picked him. Which places Trump's thoughts in Putin's head by some sort of mind-meld..... or more likely, the two worked together to put Trump in power, which means Trump committed treason to be President.
At this point, GOP need to clean house. They'll be left with Mike Pence as President, whose believed to be a Republican American, pro-business, pro-trade, pro-security. Not this Russian asshole who lies, blocks cyber-security bills, defend Russian attacks on Ukraine, removes Generals from the National Security Council meetings (FFS that's their job!), attacks NATO, attacks allies, defends Putin, attacks America, repeats Putin lies about Syria, attacks the Judicial system, defends Putin some more.... yeh we get it.
Well, let's see. On the one hand, we had a known philanderer playing "hide the cigar" with his intern. It was the worst-kept secret in Washington; you can't blackmail someone with something everyone already knows. On the other hand, we have a National Security Adviser forced to resign because he himself is a threat to national security. This, after engaging in back-door negotiations with America's competing superpower, and leaving some actual kompromat in the wake of his Moscow visits.
Yes, totally equivalent situations. ::eyeroll::
I'd go on, but I really suppose I ought to leave the rest up to SNL.
I voted for Trump, because I can't stand the Clintons. I'm not for Trump, or for the Republican party. I'm for the US - I want good government.
So even though I agree with most of Trump's positions, I'm glad that the Democrats and the press point out the ways that Trump messes up, like selecting a national security adviser who can be blackmailed. We have to correct problems like that.
I think that ability on their part is fading fast. The polls showing Trump's precipitous fall in popularity tell the story of a presidency in the kind of crisis that hasn't been seen since Iran-Contra or the Lewinsky affair, and, as with Watergate before it, those scandals didn't hit until second terms. The fact that one of Trump's longest supporters has been outed being chatty with the Russian Ambassador just weeks into the Presidency just blows me away. This is like a presidency on amphetamines.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Remember when like 70% of slashdot thought that it was a good idea to put this buffoon in power because Hillary was too "establishment" and was a dumbass about classified emails?
Any regrets yet?
My (repeated and ignored) suggestion would be a maturity filter. A kill list can handle long-lived trolls, but the maturity filter would deal with the fresh sock puppets. It should be an option, but I'd set mine for about 2 months as the youngest identity I could see.
I think it should also include a self-debasing feature. If a troll (or disposable sock puppet) replies to someone who won't see it, there would be a warning first, and if the warning is ignored, the comment would get a prefix warning like "Not a sincere reply, since [ID] was notified this comment is not visible to the ostensible recipient."
(I'm not doing a good job of putting my Slashdot affairs in order before departing...)
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
No that was Trump's earlier campaign manager, Paul Manafort, who did PR work for Russian separatists in Ukraine and was paid by the Russian government for it. He quit and was replaced by Bannon because of that taint.
We live in "interesting" times. The most ridiculous fake news is uncomfortably close to reality.
Trump's not senile. He just never grew up and has been a whining trust fund baby his entire life.
You're wrong.
It's illegal for a private citizen to engage in diplomacy for the US.
Yeah I agree the problem is lying about it. He's the incoming national security advisor. He should have said "yeah, I talked to the Russian ambassador, and I'm preparing my recommendations and report for the President based on those discussions". Just blow it off as doing his job, albeit prematurely, before the inauguration.
In theory he might have violated the Logan Act, but in
200 years nobody has ever been prosecuted under the Logan Act (one person has been indicted). As a member of the incoming administration's foreign policy team, it's not *that* weird that he would talk to diplomats from other nations and start getting to them and their positions.
Not that I'm saying it was hunky-dory to have those conversations at that time, but he certainly could have made it seem like no big deal, if he didn't lie about it.
Fake news had a very specific meaning, which is propaganda consisting of outright lies masquerading as real news to influence public opinion in a given way. We're not talking about traditional media (many people now believe the majority of the MSM are "fake news", which is in itself a triumph of fake news) We know most of it comes out of Eastern Europe, and is supporting Russian moves to destabilise and break apart the west. And it appears to be succeeding. You'll notice I've not mentioned Trump even once in that, because this story has been around for a couple of years *before* the US elections, and I've been following it. What the alt-right has done is taken the term "fake news" when applied correctly to articles supporting their cause, and turned it around to mean "any news I don't like", be it real or fake.
Well, let's face it. The real problem is that neither Flynn not Bannon are remotely competent national security advisors, neither is Rex Tillerson a sufficiently unbiased foreign minister (in the light of past attempts to secure billion dollar oil deals with Russia), or Betsy DeVos a competent education minister, not to speak of the abominable choice of attorney general. Despite all this partisan chatter and division, Republicans should be able to realize that there are plenty of Republicans or independents with higher integrity who would have been better suited for these posts. I feel sorry for guys like McCain who nowadays have to worry about their own folks more than about the opposition.
The Tea Party did the same to Obama. Remember those angry townhalls to block health care which ultimately handed the houses to the same Republicans today? They cried against executive orders. Now they have no problem with them and are outraged Democrats are doing the same back
http://saveie6.com/
Riiight. The guy hasn't even been in office 90 days and the left...
Left? I'm pretty sure John McCain isn't left...
Fact remains though - when the call was made he was
1) Not in any way part of the executive branch
2) Not in any way authorized to speak on behalf of the executive branch
And therefore: flagrantly undermining the foreign policy objectives of the sitting president of the united states. Which is a crime and this application of the Logan act would almost certainly pass constitutional muster. The problem isn't that he spoke to Russia - it's what he spoke about, things that the constitution CLEARLY reserves for the executive branch and which he had no authority to intervene in.
The fact that, if he had waited a few weeks, he would have been perfectly within the law should not make a difference. If a cop finds a 17 year old working in a strip club they won't fail to prosecute the owner because her birthday is really, really close. They won't fail to prosecute even if her birthday is tomorrow ! She's there before it's legal and that's the end of the matter. Hell in the red states they'd probably prosecute HER as well and come up with some reason to make her register as a sex offender. I mean if they do it for sexting teens they sure as hell won't let a stripper get away with it. Even if she's a totally empowered young women doing it because it makes her, personally, feel good and pays well. Actually - that would probably make them MORE eager to punish her, punishing a drug-addicted girl from extreme poverty for doing what she had to, to survive doesn't play that well with the public (even the religious right), but punishing a proud slut sure does !
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
The selection pool is actually limited to "very rich people" but Trump makes exceptions for people who have publicly said things he likes to hear. Trouble is he only TRUSTS rich people. Like many rich people, he assumes everybody who isn't rich is trying to rob him - and regardless of how he blew smoke up their asses on the campaign trail it's becoming extremely clear that he distrusts anybody who isn't very wealthy. ... but his position is secure, Trump trusts him because Bannon is rich. Reince Priebus and Sean Spicer on the other hand are getting constant flack from their boss - those two have actually done a halfway decent job, to the extent that it's possible in this administration. Spicer's sheer exasperation is visible every time he has to stand before the American people and say something flagrantly ridiculous because that's what the boss wants. Yet he had done it, even if he had to resort to prefacing it with "the president really does believe that..."
You can see the fracture lines all over the white house and the ones struggling are constantly those who aren't rich. Bannon has caused some serious fuck-ups, up to getting himself on the national security commission (and leaks suggest Trump didn't like that and hadn't known what he was signing)
Which is what you normally preface a statement with when you have difficulty accepting that the person under discussion can really belief something that stupid...
But either way - he's done exactly the job Trump wanted him to do. The guy hitched his wagon to a star (even if it was a red dwarf) to jump the capitol-hill line to the front but he's been loyally toeing the boss's line ever since, and yet his loyalty isn't being rewarded, he's just getting crapped on because we won't believe the bullshit Trump sends him to relay.
What's the real difference between Steve "I wasn't happy with how much power you gave me so I tricked you into giving me more because I'm just using you" Bannon and Sean "Yes sir, I'll tell them exactly what you want me to tell them" Spicer ? Spicer isn't rich.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
You're wrong.
It's illegal for a private citizen to engage in diplomacy for the US.
You're absolutely right. But that isn't what undid him.
1. He lied to Pence about his son having a security clearance, causing Pence to repeat that lie publicly
2. He lied about the content of his conversation with the Russian ambassador.
#1 put him in Pence's sights. #2 ensured the outcome.
This is like a presidency on amphetamines.
This is like a presidency at amature hour.
The really stupid thing is that for all the shaking-up that has been done to world leaders, the One China policy remains; Israel is still scolded; refugees are still being accepted; and there is no replacement for Obamacare on the horizon. For all the bravado, he has achieved nothing at the cost of the US's image and brand. Put another way, far from being the anti-Obama he portrayed himself to be, he has arrived at exactly the same policy positions.
The #1 thing he could do right now to show some statesmanship is to get to California, stand by the Oroville Dam and declare US infrastructure be his priority. Forget the Great Wall of Mexico. Here is a genuine crisis that is symptomatic of a deeper problem, and here is a genuine crisis handed to him on a silver platter. He want to build? Build. He wants a short-term sugar high on jobs? Employ people to build. Yes thre is a cost; but what the heck; borrow the money. He could probably borrow enough to do most of this work and still be able to say he didn't raise the national debt as much as Obama did.
But instead, he tweets about Nordstrom and how unfair they are to Ivanka.
Oh no, if Trump has started firing people for lying, where will it all end?
-- Make America hate again!
Yeah, except that all of those Republicans don't get to name nominees. They only get to "advise and consent" if they are sitting members of the United States Senate - and that advice can be freely ignored by the President, who has the sole power to appoint cabinet nominees for Senate confirmation.
If you want to see a real horror show of government, it would be Trump White House vs. the United States Congress. Vetoing bills out of spite, sending even more unqualified people for confirmation just to troll the Senate, etc. And don't think this guy wouldn't do it.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
...And, sorry, Obamacare actually *is* something to oppose. It's amazing how many of my friends lost their insurance and are now paying double or triple for less coverage. And this was all fully predictable to anyone paying attention....
I would think it would be prudent to wait to hear what the politicians who are cancelling it tell us what they are going to implement instead.
So far, it's a pig in a poke-- they're saying "we'll come up with something much much better, trust us, it will be great"-- but they don't seem to have any idea what this "better" system is going to be or how it will work.
Sorry, but I'm skeptical: I want to see some details before I'm convinced.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Fake news had a very specific meaning, which is propaganda consisting of outright lies masquerading as real news to influence public opinion in a given way.
No, the term "fake news" is looney left propaganda made up in the face of Hillary's loss to explain why she lost.
No, fake news really exists, although it the term has been coopted to mean "stuff I don't agree with." There were web sites that basically completely made stuff up. some of them had small print claiming that they were satire, like this one http://www.thatsfake.com/did-e... but some of them were just clickbait sites, making shit up and trying to go viral with links reposted so that they could score with clicks, like this one: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...
You're right to this extent, though, the term is much over-used recently.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
I kind of feel sorry for the people that brought his whole line about fighting money in politics and draining the swamp.
Sure he fired all the policy wonks, but now he's just got a white house full of money-in-politics and nobody knows what they are doing, and all the people who would normally say "No Mr President thats an extremely bad idea" to an incoming greenhorn have been fired or sidelined. I mean it was obvious to me what was gonna happen, but i've been around the block a few times and seen plenty of similar types go into govenor roles and completely screw the whole place up. These alt-right people, I just dont know about . Pepe memes and actually believing fox-news conspiracy theories does not make for a particularly useful political movement.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
It's amazing how many of my friends lost their insurance and are now paying double or triple for less coverage. And this was all fully predictable to anyone paying attention.
Can you elaborate on this? I'm truly curious, because most of the times I've come across stories of people blaming Obamacare for rising costs, it turns out that they weren't actually using Obamacare and that their increases were pretty much in line with the trend which has been going on for decades. Are these people who were using high deductible plans which were phased out, or did their employers drop coverage, or what?
Wrong is not the same as "fake". Fake news is stuff that's made up.
One way you can tell the difference is by whether a correction is made when the error is pointed out. The Time story about the MLK bust you list as fake news, for example, was followed by a correction and an apology. That's journalism. Nobody is perfect; journalism consists of acknowledging and correcting mistakes.
Check here:
http://time.com/4645541/donald...
To verify, here is the article, dated 20 January. Note that the incorrect information is removed, and the article has a correction also dated 20 January:
http://time.com/4642088/trump-...
The correction reads: Correction: An earlier version of the story said that a bust of Martin Luther King had been moved. It is still in the Oval Office.
To verify that the correction wasn't backdated, here's the archived version of the article as of 1AM on Jan 21. Notice the correction: http://web.archive.org/web/201...
That's the difference.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com