Michael Flynn

Some Republican senators are calling for an investigation.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/politics/republicans-want-flynn-investigations/

yahooyahoo said:

Some Republican senators are calling for an investigation.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/politics/republicans-want-flynn-investigations/

Good. They're changing their minds. Lets see what happens.

I based my previous post on

But Republican Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House oversight
committee, said he would not pursue an investigation into Flynn’s
contacts with Russia. “That situation is taking care of itself,”
Chaffetz told reporters on Capitol Hill. “I know that the [House
intelligence committee] was looking into the hacking issue previously,
so I think he did the right thing by stepping out.”

want to talk about strictly enforced political correctness -- what would happen to the person or persons who didn't stand up and applaud? Beer shower at best, beatdown at worst.

FilmCarp said:

It's not just Trump. It's everyone. I go do a Devils game and we are all supposed to get up and applaud any service member they choose to honor. How about teachers?

Paul Surovell maybe.

South_Mountaineer said:

dave23 said:

I do love the Wikileaks response.

"Trump's National Security Advisor Michael Flynn resigns after destabilization campaign by US spies, Democrats, press"

Who writes their stuff? Is it Fox News, or is it Russia? Nowadays, is there a difference?

there is a difference between firefighters/police and soldiers, you know. The reasons they join and the ends to which they are put are quite different.

Risking your life as part of your job helping people is a bit different than risking your life because you've chosen to be a killing machine for mostly not noble ends.

Why should we defer to that choice? It's a bad choice.

DaveSchmidt said:

Teachers deserve a standing ovation, too. But I'm not going to begrudge a desire to single out, for salutes, those whose jobs put their lives on the line. (Police officers and firefighters often receive deferential treatment in this context, too.)

I hope that someone keeps in mind the question, what did Trump know and when did he know it? Harping on the misinformation of the Vice President makes the Trumpists look like they want to avoid the issue, but I'd Trump knew for an entire month that Flynn had been talking with Russia, it begs the question, Did Trump encourage Flynn's communication with Russia?

not to change the subject, but maybe related, this mornings news told of a decision to increase the standing army forces numbers.

http://www.kcentv.com/news/nation-now/army-to-spend-300-million-on-bonuses-and-ads-to-get-6000-more-recruits/407202077

By Oct. 1, the Army must hit its target of 476,000 active duty soldiers, up from the previous goal of 460,000. Increased recruiting along with retention of more soldiers will make up the gap. President Trump has said he wants an even larger force — as many as 60,000 more soldiers.

Seems to me an undercover attempt to gear up for the next conflict they Trump up.

Time to place yer bets!

I think the tendency to sentimentalize and lionize should be kept in check, period. We're usually hearing about the "bravest" and the "finest" when contract negotiation time rolls. I'd rather look at all of these things with a clear sober eye.

fairplay said:

I hope that someone keeps in mind the question, what did Trump know and when did he know it? Harping on the misinformation of the Vice President makes the Trumpists look like they want to avoid the issue, but I'd Trump knew for an entire month that Flynn had been talking with Russia, it begs the question, Did Trump encourage Flynn's communication with Russia?

I'm not sure DJT would have known it was unethical/illegal to "do a deal" with the Ruskies before he was sworn in. Flynn will be called to testify. Will he rat out DJT?

hoops said:

not to change the subject, but maybe related, this mornings news told of a decision to increase the standing army forces numbers.

http://www.kcentv.com/news/nation-now/army-to-spend-300-million-on-bonuses-and-ads-to-get-6000-more-recruits/407202077

By Oct. 1, the Army must hit its target of 476,000 active duty soldiers, up from the previous goal of 460,000. Increased recruiting along with retention of more soldiers will make up the gap. President Trump has said he wants an even larger force — as many as 60,000 more soldiers.

Seems to me an undercover attempt to gear up for the next conflict they Trump up.

I can't imagine why we need another 60K soldiers.

For our war with Iran silly.

@GL2, where is the betting link?

I thought about that. And I am sure Trump has no concept of how much bigger a war with Iran would be than were our previous M.E. adventures.

eliz said:

For our war with Iran silly.

drummerboy said:

there is a difference between firefighters/police and soldiers, you know. The reasons they join and the ends to which they are put are quite different.

Risking your life as part of your job helping people is a bit different than risking your life because you've chosen to be a killing machine for mostly not noble ends.

Why should we defer to that choice? It's a bad choice.

DaveSchmidt said:

Teachers deserve a standing ovation, too. But I'm not going to begrudge a desire to single out, for salutes, those whose jobs put their lives on the line. (Police officers and firefighters often receive deferential treatment in this context, too.)

As someone who's had a few friends and relatives choose military careers, I find your characterization of their motives and service somewhat narrow. Of course you don't have to defer to their choice, or to my opinion. Count me among those who believe one can honor without being in thrall.

Tom_Reingold said:

@GL2, where is the betting link?

https://www.inverse.com/article/26292-donald-trump-impeachment-odds

tjohn said:

I thought about that. And I am sure Trump has no concept of how much bigger a war with Iran would be than were our previous M.E. adventures.

The Iranian guy who owns my local Persian restaurant said the same thing. He's angry and scared.

I don't know how you can really look at the choice of a military career as saying anything other than "hey, war's ok! I will now learn to kill people on demand, without regard to right and wrong." If enlistees can not see that they are pawns, that's their problem, not mine. They can have the most of noble intentions, but it still comes down to what I said above.

Anyway, I think that kind of thinking is quite mistaken and harmful. We'd be a lot better off if less people thought that way.

DaveSchmidt said:

drummerboy said:

there is a difference between firefighters/police and soldiers, you know. The reasons they join and the ends to which they are put are quite different.

Risking your life as part of your job helping people is a bit different than risking your life because you've chosen to be a killing machine for mostly not noble ends.

Why should we defer to that choice? It's a bad choice.

DaveSchmidt said:

Teachers deserve a standing ovation, too. But I'm not going to begrudge a desire to single out, for salutes, those whose jobs put their lives on the line. (Police officers and firefighters often receive deferential treatment in this context, too.)

As someone who's had a few friends and relatives choose military careers, I find your characterization of their motives and service somewhat narrow. Of course you don't have to defer to their choice, or to my opinion. Count me among those who believe one can honor without being in thrall.

The problem is not one of deference to the men and women who actually do the fighting. The problem is the mythology that somehow generals make fewer mistakes or have greater integrity than civilians. This is a dangerous myth and military mistakes are measured in killed and wounded as opposed to $$$.

drummerboy said:

I don't know how you can really look at the choice of a military career as saying anything other than "hey, war's ok! I will now learn to kill people on demand, without regard to right and wrong." If enlistees can not see that they are pawns, that's their problem, not mine. They can have the most of noble intentions, but it still comes down to what I said above.

Anyway, I think that kind of thinking is quite mistaken and harmful. We'd be a lot better off if less people thought that way.

DaveSchmidt said:

drummerboy said:

there is a difference between firefighters/police and soldiers, you know. The reasons they join and the ends to which they are put are quite different.

Risking your life as part of your job helping people is a bit different than risking your life because you've chosen to be a killing machine for mostly not noble ends.

Why should we defer to that choice? It's a bad choice.

DaveSchmidt said:

Teachers deserve a standing ovation, too. But I'm not going to begrudge a desire to single out, for salutes, those whose jobs put their lives on the line. (Police officers and firefighters often receive deferential treatment in this context, too.)

As someone who's had a few friends and relatives choose military careers, I find your characterization of their motives and service somewhat narrow. Of course you don't have to defer to their choice, or to my opinion. Count me among those who believe one can honor without being in thrall.

ml1 said:

want to talk about strictly enforced political correctness -- what would happen to the person or persons who didn't stand up and applaud? Beer shower at best, beatdown at worst.

FilmCarp said:

It's not just Trump. It's everyone. I go do a Devils game and we are all supposed to get up and applaud any service member they choose to honor. How about teachers?

I'm the test subject. I don't stand. Dirty looks, but no beer yet. Of course, I'm not easy to push around, either.

But I don't go so far as drummer boy on this. I don't think less of soldiers or officers for volunteering. Whatever their motivation is I want them to get every benefit they are promised, including excellent healthcare.

fairplay said:

I hope that someone keeps in mind the question, what did Trump know and when did he know it?

Well, it is Valentine's Day.

hey, I think they should get those benefits too. I have no problem with that.

But I do reserve the right to judge their decision.

FilmCarp said:

ml1 said:

want to talk about strictly enforced political correctness -- what would happen to the person or persons who didn't stand up and applaud? Beer shower at best, beatdown at worst.

FilmCarp said:

It's not just Trump. It's everyone. I go do a Devils game and we are all supposed to get up and applaud any service member they choose to honor. How about teachers?

I'm the test subject. I don't stand. Dirty looks, but no beer yet. Of course, I'm not easy to push around, either.

But I don't go so far as drummer boy on this. I don't think less of soldiers or officers for volunteering. Whatever their motivation is I want them to get every benefit they are promised, including excellent healthcare.

anyway, back to Flynn - apparently he was interviewed by the FBI a few weeks ago, and probably lied to them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/fbi-interviewed-mike-flynn.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1

Is Comey going to jump in? I mean he was on HRC like white on rice. I'm very interested in what he's probably not going to say.

drummerboy said:

anyway, back to Flynn - apparently he was interviewed by the FBI a few weeks ago, and probably lied to them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/fbi-interviewed-mike-flynn.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1

drummerboy said:

hey, I think they should get those benefits too. I have no problem with that.

But I do reserve the right to judge their decision.

FilmCarp said:


I'm the test subject. I don't stand. Dirty looks, but no beer yet. Of course, I'm not easy to push around, either.

But I don't go so far as drummer boy on this. I don't think less of soldiers or officers for volunteering. Whatever their motivation is I want them to get every benefit they are promised, including excellent healthcare.

You certainly have that right, and I would never suggest differently. But then, I also have the right to feel what you say is a giant bag of sh!t.

GL2 said:
I'm not sure DJT would have known it was unethical/illegal to "do a deal" with the Ruskies before he was sworn in. Flynn will be called to testify. Will he rat out DJT?

This ^^. He is so in over his head. He has no idea.

IMO, yes, Flynn will sing.

yes, you can say what you want.

Explaining your objection in big boy words may be beyond your ability though.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

drummerboy said:

hey, I think they should get those benefits too. I have no problem with that.

But I do reserve the right to judge their decision.

FilmCarp said:


I'm the test subject. I don't stand. Dirty looks, but no beer yet. Of course, I'm not easy to push around, either.

But I don't go so far as drummer boy on this. I don't think less of soldiers or officers for volunteering. Whatever their motivation is I want them to get every benefit they are promised, including excellent healthcare.

You certainly have that right, and I would never suggest differently. But then, I also have the right to feel what you say is a giant bag of sh!t.

FWIW: Those that I know joined the military to escape the ghetto with a promise of a paid-for college education.

I think that is great. Nimitz got appointed to the Naval Academy to get out of a dirt poor Texas life. That was a good investment for the taxpayers.

kthnry said:

tjohn said:

I thought about that. And I am sure Trump has no concept of how much bigger a war with Iran would be than were our previous M.E. adventures.

The Iranian guy who owns my local Persian restaurant said the same thing. He's angry and scared.

It may be a quick war. We do have tactical nukes. Malignant narcissists can be very surprising.

In a private conversation with a foreign policy expert, Scarborough
reported, Trump asked — repeatedly — why we have nuclear weapons if we
don’t use them.