Michael Flynn was sacrificed to please neocons. This had proved was not
enough... Despite his strong anti-Iranian position Michael Flynn was less of interventionist that
his colleges in Trump administration.
One paradox that he never solved was his deliberate attempt to frame terrorist as nothing more
that organized crime, but at the same respect condemn governments that are "Islamic Republics," whom
attempt to enforce the laws as an ineffective solution, and attempting to associate the with the
other 1.6 billion Muslims by painting them as "Radical Islam."
As if there is any relationship to relationship to Islam other than it is the predominant religion
in a majority of the area where they commit their criminal activity. As if the political war with
terrorist is a function of a label that is of itself a oversimplification of the issues.
Indeed, suggesting it is a nothing more than 'political correctness" and ignoring the possibility
that it might be a function of setting the conditions in an otherwise polygon of political justice.
This argument alone is evidence of the his willingness to develop domestic political will for war
with a simple argument. Nevertheless, as a national strategy, it lacks the a foundational argument
to motivate friendly regional actors who's authority is founded on political Islam.
In 2008 a national election was held and the pyrrhic nature of the war in Iraq adjudicated via
the process of democratic choice that ended support for continued large scale conventional occupation.
That there is some new will to continue large scale conventional occupation seems unlikely, and as
a democratic country, leaders must find other means to reach the desired end state, prosecuting contiguous
operations to suppress, neutralize, and destroy "ALL" who use terrorism to expand and enforce their
political will with a deliberate limited wars that have methodological end states.
Lastly, sounding more like a General MacArther, the General Flynn's diffuse strategy seems to
ignore the most principles of war deduced by Von Clausewitz and Napoleon: Concentration of force
on the objective to be attacked. Instead, fighting an ideology "Radical Islam" seems more abstract
then any splatter painting of modern are in principle form it suggests a commitment to simplicity
to motivate our nation to prepare for and endure the national commitment to a long war.
Since we can all agree there is no magical solution, then normative pragmatism of the likes that
General. Flynn's assessment provides, must be taken into account in an operation and tactical MDMP.
Ignoring and silencing Subject Matter Experts (SME's) will net nothing more than failure, a failure
that could be measured in innocent civilian lives as a statistical body count.
I could see General Flynn's suggestions and in expertise bolstering a movement to establish a
CORP level active duty unit to prepare, plan, and implemented in phases 0, IV, & V (JP 5-0) . Bear
in mind, Counter Insurgency (COIN) was never considered a National strategy but instead at tactical
strategy and at most an operational strategy.
"... "President Trump instructed [his generals] in a very open way that the YPG will no longer be given weapons. He openly said
that this absurdity should have ended much earlier ," Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu told reporters after the phone call. ..."
"... The YPG is the Syrian sister organization of the Turkish-Kurdish terror group PKK. Some weapons the U.S. had delivered to the
YPK in Syria to fight the Islamic State have been recovered from PKK fighters in Turkey who were out to kill Turkish security personal.
Despite that, supply for the YPG continued. In total over 3,500 truckloads were provided to it by the U.S. military. Only recently the
YPK received some 120 armored Humvees , mine clearance vehicles and other equipment. ..."
"... The generals in the White House and other parts of the administration were caught flat-footed by the promise Trump has made.
The Washington Post writes : "Initially, the administration's national security team appeared surprised by the Turks' announcement and
uncertain what to say about it. The State Department referred questions to the White House, and hours passed with no confirmation from
the National Security Council." ..."
"... The U.S. military uses the YPG as proxy power in Syria to justify and support its occupation of north-east Syria, The intent
of the occupation is , for now, to press the Syrian government into agreeing to a U.S. controlled "regime change": ..."
"... When in 2014 the U.S. started to use Kurds in Syria as its foot-soldiers, it put the YPG under the mantle of the so called
Syrian Democratic Forces and paid some Syrian Arabs to join and keep up the subterfuge. This helped to counter the Turkish argument
that the U.S. was arming and supporting terrorists. But in May 2017 the U.S. announced to arm the YPG directly without the cover of
the SDF. The alleged purpose was to eliminate the Islamic State from the city of Raqqa. ..."
"... A spokesperson of the SDF, the ethnic Turkman Talaf Silo, recently defected and went over to the Turkish side. The Turkish
government is certainly well informed about the SDF and knows that its political and command structure is dominated by the YPK. The
whole concept is a sham. ..."
"... Sometimes it's hard to see if Trump actually believed what he was saying about foreign policy on the campaign trail -- but
either way it doesn't matter much as he seems incapable of navigating the labyrinth of the Deep State even if he had in independent
thought in his head. I don't expect US weapons to stop making their way into Kurdish hands as they try to extend their mini-Israel-with-oil
foothold in Syria. But it would certainly be a welcome sight if the US left Syria alone for once! ..."
"... Trump personally sent General Flynn to recruit back Erdogan and the Turks right before the election. Flynn wrote his now infamous
editorial "Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support" and published in "The Hill". http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support
"... But if you know the role he played for Trump in the campaign and then the post-election role as soon to be NSC advisor, you
will see that Trump was sending him to bring Turkey back into the fold after the coup attempt by CIA, Gulen and Turkey's AF and US State
Dept failed. ..."
"... Trump wanted to prevent the Turkish Stream. It was a huge rival to his LNG strategy. All these are why Flynn did what he did
for Trump. Now Trump has to battle CIA and State, as well as the CENTCOM-Israeli plans for insurgencies in Syria. It's not just the
Kurd issue or the other needs of NATO to hold the bases in Turkey. It's the whole southwest containment of Russian gas and Russian naval
power, and the reality of sharing the Mediterranean as well as MENA with the Bear. ..."
"... Furthermore, I've always been suspicious of Erdogan's 'turn' toward Russia. Many have suspected that the attempted coup was
staged by Erdogan (with CIA help?) so as to enable Erdogan to remain in office. IMO Erdogan joined the 'Assad must go!' effort not just
because he benefited from the oil trade but because he leans toward Sunnis (Surely he was aware of the thinking that: the road to Tehran
runs through Damascus .) ..."
President Trump is attempting to calm down the U.S.
conflict with Turkey . The
military junta in the White House has different
plans. It now attempts to circumvent the decision the president communicated to his Turkish counterpart. The result will be more
Yesterday the Turkish foreign minister surprisingly
announced a phone call
President Trump had held with President Erdogan of Turkey.
United States President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan spoke on the phone on Nov. 24 only days after
a Russia-Turkey-Iran summit on Syria, with Ankara saying that Washington has pledged not to send weapons to the People's Protection
Units (YPG) any more .
"President Trump instructed [his generals] in a very open way that the YPG will no longer be given weapons. He openly said
that this absurdity should have ended much earlier ," Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu told reporters after the phone call.
Will be speaking to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey this morning about bringing peace to the mess that I inherited
in the Middle East. I will get it all done, but what a mistake, in lives and dollars (6 trillion), to be there in the first place!
12:04 PM - 24 Nov 2017
During the phone call Trump must have escaped his minders for a moment and promptly tried to make, as announced, peace with Erdogan.
The issue of arming the YPG is really difficult for Turkey to swallow. Ending that would probably make up for the
recent NATO blunder of presenting the founder of modern Turkey Kemal Atatürk and Erdogan himself as enemies.
The generals in the White House and other parts of the administration were caught flat-footed by the promise Trump has made.
The Washington Post
writes : "Initially, the administration's national security team appeared surprised by the Turks' announcement and uncertain
what to say about it. The State Department referred questions to the White House, and hours passed with no confirmation from the
National Security Council."
The White House finally released what the Associated Presscalled :
a cryptic statement about the phone call that said Trump had informed the Turk of "pending adjustments to the military support
provided to our partners on the ground in Syria."
Neither a read-out of the call nor the statement AP refers to are currently available on the White House website.
The U.S. military uses the YPG as proxy power in Syria to justify and support
occupation of north-east Syria, The intent of the occupation is , for now,
to press the Syrian government into agreeing to a U.S. controlled "regime change":
U.S. officials have said they plan to keep American troops in northern Syria -- and continue working with Kurdish fighters --
to pressure Assad to make concessions during peace talks brokered by the United Nations in Geneva, stalemated for three years
now. "We're not going to just walk away right now," Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said last week.
To solidify its position the U.S. needs to further build up and strengthen its YPG mercenary forces.
When in 2014 the U.S. started to use Kurds in Syria as its foot-soldiers, it put the YPG under the mantle of the so called
Syrian Democratic Forces and paid some Syrian Arabs to join and keep up the subterfuge. This helped to counter the Turkish argument
that the U.S. was arming and supporting terrorists. But in May 2017 the U.S.
to arm the YPG directly without the cover of the SDF. The alleged purpose was to eliminate the Islamic State from the city of Raqqa.
The YPG had been unwilling to fight for the Arab city unless the U.S. would provide it with more money, military supplies and
support. All were provided. The U.S. special forces, who control the YPG fighters, directed an immense amount of aerial and artillery
ammunition against the city. Any potential enemy position was destroyed by large ammunition and intense bombing before the YPG infantry
proceeded. In the end few YPG fighters died in the fight. The Islamic State was let go or eliminated from the city but
so was the city of Raqqa . The intensity
of the bombardment of the medium size city was at times ten
times greater than the bombing in all of Afghanistan. Airwarsreported :
Since June, an estimated 20,000 munitions were fired in support of Coalition operations at Raqqa . Images captured by journalists
in the final days of the assault show a city in ruins
Several thousand civilians were killed in the indiscriminate onslaught.
The Islamic State in Syria and Iraq is defeated. It no longer holds any ground. There is no longer any justification to further
arm and supply the YPG or the dummy organization SDF.
But the generals want to continue to do so to further their larger plans. They are laying grounds to circumvent their president's
promise. The Wall Street Journal seems to be the only outlet to
pick up on the subterfuge:
President Donald Trump's administration is preparing to stop sending weapons directly to Kurdish militants battling Islamic State
in Syria, dealing a political blow to the U.S.'s most reliable ally in the civil war, officials said Friday.
The Turkish announcement came as a surprise in Washington, where military and political officials in Mr. Trump's administration
appeared to be caught off-guard. U.S. military officials said they had received no new guidance about supplying weapons to the
Kurdish forces. But they said there were no immediate plans to deliver any new weapons to the group. And the U.S. can continue
to provide the Kurdish forces with arms via the umbrella Syrian militant coalition
The "military officials" talking to the WSJ have found a way to negate Trump's promise. A spokesperson of the SDF, the ethnic
Turkman Talaf Silo, recently
defected and went over to the Turkish side. The Turkish government is certainly well informed about the SDF and knows that its
political and command structure is dominated by the YPK. The whole concept is a sham.
But the U.S. needs the YPG to keep control of north-east Syria. It has to continue to provide whatever the YPG demands, or it
will have to give up its larger scheme against Syria.
The Turkish government will soon find out that the U.S. again tried to pull wool over its eyes. Erdogan will be furious when he
discovers that the U.S. continues to supply war material to the YPG, even when those deliveries are covered up as supplies for the
The Turkish government released
a photograph showing
Erdogan and five of his aids taking Trump's phonecall. Such a release and the announcement of the call by the Turkish foreign minister
are very unusual. Erdogan is taking prestige from the call and the public announcement is to make sure that Trump sticks to his promise.
This wide publication will also increase Erdogan's wrath when he finds out that he was again deceived.
Posted by b on November 25, 2017 at 12:14 PM |
Sometimes it's hard to see if Trump actually believed what he was saying about foreign policy on the campaign trail -- but
either way it doesn't matter much as he seems incapable of navigating the labyrinth of the Deep State even if he had in independent
thought in his head. I don't expect US weapons to stop making their way into Kurdish hands as they try to extend their mini-Israel-with-oil
foothold in Syria. But it would certainly be a welcome sight if the US left Syria alone for once!
interpret this act on Election eve as a pecuniary fulfillment by Flynn of a lobbying contract (which existed).
But if you know the role he played for Trump in the campaign and then the post-election role as soon to be NSC advisor,
you will see that Trump was sending him to bring Turkey back into the fold after the coup attempt by CIA, Gulen and Turkey's AF
and US State Dept failed.
Flynn understood the crucial need for US and NATO to hold Turkey and prevent the Russians from getting Erdogan as an ally for
Syria and the Black Sea, the Balkans and Mediterranean as well as Iran, Qatar and Eurasia. Look at what has transpired between
Turkey and Russia since. Gas will be flowing through the Turkish Stream and Erdogan conforms to Putin's wishes.
Trump wanted to prevent the Turkish Stream. It was a huge rival to his LNG strategy. All these are why Flynn did what he
did for Trump. Now Trump has to battle CIA and State, as well as the CENTCOM-Israeli plans for insurgencies in Syria. It's not
just the Kurd issue or the other needs of NATO to hold the bases in Turkey. It's the whole southwest containment of Russian gas
and Russian naval power, and the reality of sharing the Mediterranean as well as MENA with the Bear.
Flynn was on it for Trump. And the IC and State want him prosecuted for defying their efforts to replace Erdogan with a stooge
like Gulen. It looks like Mueller is pursuing that against the General.
Its not a problem for US to drop Kurds if they are no longer needed, BUT for now they are essential for US/Israel/Saudi goals,
therefore you can bet 100% Kurds support will continue. Trump's order (he hasn't made it official either) will be easily circumvented.
The real question is, what Resistance will do with the backstabbing Kurds? It wont be easy to make a deal while Kurds
maintain absurd demands and as long as they have full Axis of Terror support.
Go Iraq's way like they reclaimed Kirkuk? US might have sitten out that one, I doubt they'll allow this to happen in Syria
as well, unless they get something in return.
While America's standard duplicity of saying one thing while doing the opposite has been known for decades, they have been able
to play games mainly because of the weakness of the other actors in the region.
The tables have turned now, but America still thinks it holds top dog position.
Wordplay, semantics and legal loopholes wont be tolerated for very long, and when hundreds of US boots return home in body bags
a choice will have to be made - escalate, or run away.
Previous behavior dictates run away, but times have changed.
A cornered enemy is the most dangerous, and the USA has painted itself into a very small corner...
Gee. While reading B's article what got to my mind is: "Turkey is testing the ground". Whatever Trump said to Erdogan on the phone,
it seems to me that the Turks are playing a card to see how the different actors in the US that seems to follow different agendas
will react. If Turkey concludes that the US will continue to back YPG, it's split from the US and will be definitive.
Erdogan is shifting away from US/NATO. He even hinted today that he might talk to Assad. That's huge! I wouldn't be surprised
if Turkey leaves NATO sooner than later. And if it's the case, it will be a major move of a tectonic amplitude.
Trump.. "Will be speaking to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey this morning about bringing peace to the mess that I inherited
in the Middle East. I will get it all done, but what a mistake, in lives and dollars (6 trillion), to be there in the first place!"
Surely by now Erdogan must realise that whatever the US President says and promises will be circumvented by the State Department,
the Pentagon, the 17 US intel agencies (including the CIA and the NSA) and rogue individuals in these and other US government
departments and agencies, and in Congress as well (Insane McCain comes to mind)? Not to mention the fact that the Israeli government
and the pro-Israeli lobby on Capitol Hill exercise huge influence over sections of the US government.
If Erdogan hasn't figured out the schizoid behaviour of the US from past Turkish experience and the recent experience of Turkey's
neighbours (and the Ukraine is one such neighbour), he must not be receiving good information.
Though as Jean says, perhaps Erdogan is giving the US one last chance to demonstrate that it has a coherent and reliable policy
towards the Middle East.
Well, the US policy has been coherent and reliable in the last years. It enhanced local conflicts, supported both sides at
the same time but with different intensities. Whoever wins would be "our man". Old stuff since the Byzantine period. It always
takes a lot of time to prove the single actions that were done. In most cases we learn about it years later. The delay is so big
and unpleasant that quite a number of folks escapes to stupid narratives that explain everything in one step, and therefore nothing.
By the way: is the interest of Kurds to remain under the umbrella of the Syrian state but not be governed by Baath type of Arabic
The Kurds (PKK basically) are only necessary to give a "face" to the force the US is trying to align in E. Syria. The "fighting"
against ISIS (if there really was any) is coming to a close. The Chiefs of ISIS have been airlifted to somewhere nearby, and the
foreign mercenary forces sent elsewhere by convoy. ALL the valuable personnel have now become "HTS2" with reversible vests. These,
plus the US special forces are the basis of a new armed anti-Syrian force. (Note that one general let slip that there are 5'000
US forces in E-Syria - not the 500 spoken of in the MSM).
So Trump may well be correct in saying that the Kurds (specifically) will not get any more arms - because they have other demands
and might make peace with the Syrian Government, to keep at least some part of their territorial gains. The ISIS "bretheren" and
foreign mercenaries do not want any peaceful solution because it would mean their elimination.. So The CIA and Pentagon will probably
continue arms supplies to "HTS2" - but not the Kurds.
(ex-ISIS members; Some are from Saudi Arabia, Qatar - the EU and the US, as well as parts of Russia and China. They are not
farming types but will find themselves with some of the best arable land in Syria. Which belonged to Syrian-arabs-christians-Druzes-Yadzis
etc. Who wil want their properties back.)
Note that the US forces at Tanf are deliberately not letting humanitarian help reach the nearby refugee camp. Starvation and
deprivation will force many of the younger members to become US paid terrorists.
thanks b.. i tend to agree with @4 jean and @5 jen... the way i see it, there is either a real disconnect inside the usa where
the president gets to say one thing, but another part of the establishment can do another, or trump has made his last lie to turkey
here and turkey is going to say good bye to it's involvement with the usa in any way that can be trusted.. seems like some kind
of internal usa conflict to me at this point, but maybe it is all smoke and mirrors to continue on with the same charade.. i mostly
think internal usa conflict at this point..
Odd that no one has mentioned the fact the US was behind the attempted coup, where Erdogan was on a plane with two rogue Syrian
jets that stood down rather than execute the kill shot. I have read opinion that the fighter pilots were "lit up" by Russian missile
batteries and informed by radio they would not survive unless they shut down their weapons targeting immediately. This is probably
a favour Putin reminds Erdogan of on a regular basis, whenever Erdo tries to play Sultan. The attempted coup/asassination also
shows Erdogan exactly how much he can trust the US/Zionists at any level.
And Edrogan must also know Syria was once at least partly in the US-orbit, as Syria was the destination for many well-documented
US-ordered rendition/torture cases. It is probable Mossad (or their proxy thugs) killed Assad's father and older brother, so Erdo
knows he's better relying on Putin than Trumpty Dumbdy.
Erdogan is about to make a u-turn toward Syria. He is furious at Saudi Arabia for boycotting its ally Qatar, for talking about
owning Sunni Islam and by the continuous support of Islamists and Sunni Kurds in Syria.
Erdogan is preparing the turkish public opinion to a shift away from the USA-Israeli axis. This may get him many points in the
2019 election if the war in Syria is stopped, most Syrian refugees are back, Turkish companies are involved in the reconstruction
and the YPG neutralized. Erdogan has 1 year and half to make this to happen. For that he badly needs Bashar al Assad and his army
on his side.
Therefore he is evaluating what is the next move and he needs to know where the USA is standing about Turkey and Syria. Until
now the messages from the USA are contradictory yet Erdogan keeps telling his supporters that the USA is plotting against Turkey
and against Islam. Erdogan's reputation also is been threatened by the outcome of Reza Zarrab's trial in the US where the corruption
of his party may be exposed.
That is why Erdogan is making another check about the US intentions before Erdogan he starts the irreversible shift toward
the Iran-Russia (+Qatar and Syria) axis.
missing in this analysis is oil gas ... producers, refiners, slavers, middle crooks, and the LNG crowd :Israel, Fracking, LNG
and wall street... these are the underlying directing forces that will ultimately dictate when the outsiders have had enough fight
against Assad over Assad's oil and Assad's refusal to allow outsiders to install their pipelines. Until then, gangland intelligence
agencies will continue the divide, destroy and conquer strategies sufficient to keep the profits flowing. The politicians cannot
move until the underlying corruptions resolve..
The word 'byzantine' has been used for centuries to describe the intricate and multi-leveled forms of agreement, betrayal, treachery
and achievement among the shifting power brokers in the region. The US alone has three major and another three minor players at
work - often fighting each other. If however, it thinks it can outplay people whose lives are steeped in such a living tradition,
it is sadly deluded and will one day be in for a very rude surprise. Even the Russians have had difficulty navigating that maze.
When confronted with such a 'Gordian knot' of treachery and shifting alliances, Alexander the Great drew his sword and cut
through it with a vision informed by the sage Socrates as taught by Aristotle.
Despite claiming to represent such a western heritage, the US has no such Socratic wisdom, no Aristotelian logic, and no visionary
leadership that could enable it to do what Alexander did. Lacking this, it is destined to get lost in its' own hubris, and be
consumed by our current version of that region's gordian knot.
I'd really hoped that Donald Trump® would be the "outsider" that both the MSM and he have been insisting he is for the past couple
of years. Other than the Reality TV Show faux conflicts with which the MSM entertains us nightly, I see no such "rogue" Administration.
This say one thing, and do the other has been US foreign policy forever.
Recall, for instance that on February 21, 2014, Obama's State Department issued a statement hailing Ukrainian President Yanukovych
for signing an agreement with the "pro-democracy Maidan Protest" leaders in which he acquiesced to all of their demands.
Then, on February 22, 2014, the US State Department cheered the "peaceful and Constitutional" coup after neo-nazis stormed
A few months later, Secretary of State Kerry hailed the Minsk Treaty to end the war in Ukraine. Later that day, Vickie Nuland
said there was no way her Ukies would stop shelling civilians, and sure enough they didn't (until they'd been on the retreat for
weeks, and came whimpering back to the negotiations table).
A couple years later, Kerry announced that the US and Russia would coordinate aerial assaults in Syria. The next day, "Defense"
Secretary Carter said, "no way," and within a week or so, we "accidentally" bombed Syrian forces at Deir ez Zoir for over an hour.
From my perspective, they keep us chasing the next squirrel, while bickering amongst each other about each squirrel. But the
wolves are still devouring the lambs, with only the Bear preventing a complete extinction.
What we know with at least some level of confidence...
Dump is not the 'decider'...the junta is...he's just a cardboard cutout sitting behind the oval office desk...
And he's got no one to blame but himself...he came in talking a big game about cleaning house and got himself cleaned out of
being an actual president...
This was inevitable from the moment he caved on Flynn...the only person he didn't need to vet with the senate...and a position
that wields a lot of power...
This was his undoing on many levels...not only because he faced a hostile deep state and even his own party in congress with
no one by his side [other than Flynn]...
...but because it showed that he had no balls and would not stand by his man...
This is not the stuff leaders are made of...
The same BS we see with Turkey is playing out with Russia on the Ukraine issue...
Now the junta and their enablers in congress want to start sending offensive arms to Ukraine...Dump and his platitudes to Putin...no
matter how much he may mean it...mean nothing...he's not in charge...
It's hard to tell what Erdoğan is doing or intending other than that he is navigating something - objective TBD. It'll be interesting
to see if he constrains the use of Incirlik airbase should the US keep arming the YPG/PKK forces. Airpower is the enabler (sole
enabler, IMO) of the/any Kurdish overreach inside Syria. Seems like Erdoğan holds the ace card in this muddle but has yet to play
Seems like Turkey has more than one card to play. A commenter on another site mentioned recently that the US really doesn't
want Erdogan to have that S-400 system from Russia. Got me thinking, could Russia have deliberately loaded Erdogan's hand with
that additional card to help him negotiate with the US?
Turkey may well leave NATO and as others have pointed out, this would be a game changer far beyond the matter of the US's illegal
presence in NE Syria. This possibility brings immense existential gravitas to Erdogan's position right now. He could ask
for many concessions at this point, not to leave. And from the Eurasian point of view, it doesn't matter if he leaves or stays,
while from the western view, it matters greatly.
Would the US give up Syria, in order to keep Turkey in NATO? It's a western dichotomy, not one that affects Asia. It would
be simple to throw S-400 at that dynamic to watch it squirm.
The plays the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King.
As the endgame plays out, Erdogan's conscience may be revealed.
b has made the point that the partition that US-led proxy forces have carved out is unsustainable. But it would be sustainable
if Erdogan can be convinced to allow trade via Turkey.
For that reason, I thought Trump's ceasing direct military aid to the Kurds made sense as it provided Erdogan with an excuse
to allow land routes for trade/supply. Erdogan can argue that he wants to encourage such good behavior and doesn't want to make
US an enemy (Turkey is still a NATO country).
Furthermore, I've always been suspicious of Erdogan's 'turn' toward Russia. Many have suspected that the attempted coup
was staged by Erdogan (with CIA help?) so as to enable Erdogan to remain in office. IMO Erdogan joined the 'Assad must go!' effort
not just because he benefited from the oil trade but because he leans toward Sunnis (Surely he was aware of the thinking that:
the road to Tehran runs through Damascus .)
Hasn't Erdogan's vehement anti-Kurdish stance done R+6 a disservice? It seems to me that it has helped USA to convince
Kurds to fight for them and has also been a convenient excuse for Erdogan to hold onto Idlib where al Queda forces have refuge.
If Erdogan was really soooo angry with Washington, and soooo dependent on Moscow, then why not relax his anti-Kurdish
stance so as to bring Kurds back into the Syrian orbit?
Erdogan may feel that if he relaxed his stance against the Syrian Kurds, it could embolden Turkish Kurds to further pursue their
agenda. It would also make him appear weak towards his supporters.
Erdogan is NOT going to leave NATO. Why should he? It would be the stupidest chess move ever? He's in the club and they can't
kick him out. He can cause all the trouble he wants and hobble that huge machine that is the western alliance. He will not get
EU membership, but he has his NATO ID CARD and that ain't bad. Erdo now knows that the poor bastard Trumps is WORTHLESS that he
is a toothless executive in name only. This is a wake up call, if I were Erdo, I would be very afraid of the USA and it's Syria,
MENA policy. It is being run by LUNATICS and is a slow moving train wreak. So for now, Erdo must be looking at Moscow, admiring
Putin for this is a man who has his shit together and truly knows how to run a country. Maybe even a sense of admiration and more
respect for Putin is even present. If I were Erdo, I'd double down in my support for Russia's Syria policy.
You do not get it:
„...which happens to be a socialist and secular party interested in pan-Arab unity...not nationalism..."
According to this ideology the coherence of a society comes from where? And who is excluded if one applies it?
So your contribution is just a rant using rancidic rhetoric tools. But I will not call you „flunkerbandit". My advice is to move
to this area and have a look into such a society from a more close position. Armchair type of vocal leadership does not help.
@23 "Erdogan is NOT going to leave NATO. Why should he?"
I guess one possible reason would be this: as long as Turkey remains in NATO then he is obliged to allow a US military presence
in his country, and that's just asking for another attempt at a military coup.
After all, wasn't Incirlik airbase a hotbed of coup-plotters during the last coup attempt?
"when the Syrian settlement is achieved, Syria's democratic forces will join the Syrian army." "When the Syrian state stabilizes, we can say that the Americans did what they said, then withdraw as they did in Iraq and
set a date for their departure and leave."
Nothing new here, nothing good either. Kurds so far are keeping up their demands of de-facto independence under fig-leaf of
"we are part of federalised Syria" with weak central government and autonomous Kurds. Thats how US plan to castrate Syria. Russia
offered cultural autonomy, Kurds rejected.
As for Americans "withdrawing" willfully, it never happened. Iraq had to kick them out, and then US used ISIS and Kurds to
get back in.
As for Syria's stabilization part, US is doing everything in its power to prevent it.
@31 France actually withdrew from NATO in 1966. It remained "committed" to the collective defence of western Europe, without being,
you know, "committed" to it.
So, yeah, France kicked all the foreign troops out of France in 1967, precisely because its withdrawal from NATO's Integrated
Military Command meant that the French were no longer under any obligation to allow NATO troops on its soil.
But France had to formally withdraw from that Command first, and the reason that de Gaulle gave for withdrawing were exactly
that: remaining meant ceding sovereignty to a supra-national organization i.e. NATO Integrated Military Command.
That France retained "membership" of NATO's political organizations even after that withdrawal was little more than a fig-leaf.
After all, NATO's purpose isn't "political", it is "military".
"The Decider" is Trump's apparent self image. He can't be enjoying the Presidency and the controls exerted upon him by others
among the "Deep State" (whom I suppose have effectively cowed him into behaving via serious threats).
If he already had money and power, as it appears that he had, he gained little by taking the crown. He has less power because
he is now controlled by a number of forces (CIA, NSA, Media, MIC and etc.) as he remains under constant assault by his natural
Big mistake dumping Flynn.
Now you take another kind of asshole in the person of Obama - a guy that had nothing - you have a malleable character who enjoys
the pomp and circumstance. Really didn't need any persuading to do anything required of him.
Here is a recent report from the Turkish Prime Minister supporting Trump's "lie" about ending support for the Kurds....what will
history show occured?
ISTANBUL, Nov. 26 (Xinhua) -- Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim said on Sunday that his country is expecting the United
States to end its partnership with the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its military wing, the People's Protection
"Since the very beginning, we have said that it is wrong for the U.S. to partner with PKK's cousin PYD and YPG in the fight
against Daesh (Islamic State) terrorist group," Yildirim told the press in Istanbul prior to his departure for Britain.
Ankara sees the Kurdish groups as an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) fighting against the Turkish government
for over 30 years, while Washington regards them as a reliable ground force against the Islamic State (IS), also known as Daesh.
U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday spoke to his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan over the phone, pledging not to
provide weapons to the YPG any more, an irritant that has hurt bilateral ties, according to the Turkish side.
Yildirim noted that Washington has described it as an obligation rather than an option to support the Kurdish groups on the
ground. "But since Daesh (IS) is now eliminated then this obligation has disappeared," he added.
It would be nice if Erdogan when withdrawing from NATO (Assuming he does this in the next 12-18 months) would say something like.
"We really like President Trump - and we trust his word implicitly. The problem is, although we trust his word, we know
he is not in control so his word is useless and best ignored. Though of course - we still trust he means well."
That would be a nice backhander to hear from Erdopig.
Speculation about Turkey leaving NATO seems farfetched. Turkey has NATO over a barrel. It has been a member for decades and what
would it gain by leaving? Nothing. By staying it continues to influence and needle at the same time. Turkey will only leave when
NATO throws it out, which isn't going to happen.
Comey is actually a politician. And he definitely wanted to keep Russiagate hot, and probably was
instrumental in creating it ... As this situation suits him political desire for higher autonomy from
"... James Comey asserted in his extraordinary testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee that the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is authorized to override Justice Department oversight procedures, a questionable claim which if true would raise serious questions about long-standing rules aimed at preventing abuses by federal law enforcement officials. ..."
"... The former head of the FBI told the Senate panel that he believed he had received a direction from the president in February that the FBI end its investigation of Michael Flynn's alleged involvement with Russia -- a direction with which he and his kitchen-cabinet of "FBI senior leadership" unilaterally decided not to comply. The Comey cabinet then decided that it would not report the receipt of this direction to Attorney General Jeff Sessions or any other Justice Department superior. ..."
"... Rosenstein criticized Comey's decision to act without consultation from the Department of Justice as usurping the Attorney General's authority and an attempt to "supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the Justice Department. Comey had violated a "well-established process" for how to deal with situations where to Attorney General faces a conflict of interest, according to Rosenstein. ..."
"... "The Director was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016," Rosenstein wrote. "The Director now defends his decision by asserting that he believed attorney General Loretta Lynch had a conflict. But the FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the Justice Department . ..."
"... Comey's assertion that the FBI can override standard protocols could endanger that independence, according to a former high-ranking federal law enforcement official. ..."
"... "Mr. Comey is describing an FBI director who essentially answers to no one. But the police powers of the government are awesome and often abused, and the only way to prevent or correct abuses is to report to elected officials who are accountable to voters. A director must resist intervention to obstruct an investigation, but he and the agency must be politically accountable or risk becoming the FBI of J. Edgar Hoover," the Wall Street Journal wrote . ..."
"... A 2005 report from the FBI's Office of Inspector General on the Department of Justice's guidelines for FBI investigations stated, "Attorneys General and FBI leadership have uniformly agreed that the Attorney General Guidelines are necessary and desirable, and they have referred to the FBI's adherence to the Attorney General Guidelines as the reason why the FBI should not be subjected to a general legislative charter or to statutory control over the exercise of some of its most intrusive authorities. " ..."
James Comey asserted in his extraordinary testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee
that the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is authorized to override Justice Department
oversight procedures, a questionable claim which if true would raise serious questions about long-standing
rules aimed at preventing abuses by federal law enforcement officials.
The former head of the FBI told the Senate panel that he believed he had received a direction
from the president in February that the FBI end its investigation of Michael Flynn's alleged involvement
with Russia -- a direction with which he and his kitchen-cabinet of "FBI senior leadership" unilaterally
decided not to comply. The Comey cabinet then decided that it would not report the receipt of this
direction to Attorney General Jeff Sessions or any other Justice Department superior.
The group decided that it could override standard FBI protocol and possibly legal obligations
to report the incident because of its expectations that Sessions would recuse himself from the Russia
matter, although that recusal would not come until weeks later. The Comey cabinet also decided that
it wasn't obligated to approach the acting Deputy Attorney General because he would likely be replaced
"We concluded it made little sense to report it to Attorney General Sessions, who we expected
would likely recuse himself from involvement in Russia-related investigations. (He did so two weeks
later.) The Deputy Attorney General's role was then filled in an acting capacity by a United States
Attorney, who would also not be long in the role," Comey said. "After discussing the matter, we decided
to keep it very closely held, resolving to figure out what to do with it down the road as our investigation
According to three different former federal law enforcement officials, who spoke on the condition
of anonymity, there is no precedent for the director of the FBI to refuse to inform a Deputy Attorney
General of a matter because of his or her "acting" status nor to use the expectation of a recusal
as a basis for withholding information.
"This is an extraordinary usurpation of power. Not something you'd expect from the supposedly
by-the-books guys at the top of the FBI," one of those officials told Breitbart News.
The closest precedent to the Comey cabinet's decision to conceal information from Justice Department
superiors is likely Comey's widely criticized earlier decision to go public about the investigation
of Hillary Clinton's emails. That decision received a sharp rebuke in the May 9 memo by Deputy Attorney
General Rod Rosenstein that formed the basis for Comey's firing by Trump.
Rosenstein criticized Comey's decision to act without consultation from the Department of
Justice as usurping the Attorney General's authority and an attempt to "supplant federal prosecutors
and assume command of the Justice Department. Comey had violated a "well-established process" for
how to deal with situations where to Attorney General faces a conflict of interest, according to
"The Director was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016," Rosenstein
wrote. "The Director now defends his decision by asserting that he believed attorney General Loretta
Lynch had a conflict. But the FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and
assume command of the Justice Department . There is a well-established process for other
officials to step in when a conflict requires the recusal of the Attorney General. On July 5, however,
the Director announced his own conclusions about the nation's most sensitive criminal investigation,
without the authorization of duly appointed Justice Department leaders."
Comey's testimony on Thursday seemed to double-down on this defense, which amounts to a claim
that the FBI's top agents can act outside of the ordinary processes intended to establish oversight
and accountability at the nation's top law enforcement agency.
The FBI's adherence to Department of Justice guidelines and instructions from Attorneys General
has been a centerpiece of its ongoing independence, often cited by officials as a reason why the
FBI does not need a general legislative charter that would restrict or control by statute its authority.
Comey's assertion that the FBI can override standard protocols could endanger that independence,
according to a former high-ranking federal law enforcement official.
"He's not only put the credibility of the bureau in doubt, he's now putting the entire basis for
our independence in jeopardy," the official said.
The official pointed to an editorial in the Wall Street Journal as explaining the dangers of an
FBI that decides not to inform the Department of Justice of its activities.
"Mr. Comey is describing an FBI director who essentially answers to no one. But the police
powers of the government are awesome and often abused, and the only way to prevent or correct abuses
is to report to elected officials who are accountable to voters. A director must resist intervention
to obstruct an investigation, but he and the agency must be politically accountable or risk becoming
the FBI of J. Edgar Hoover," the
Journal wrote .
A 2005 report from the FBI's
Office of Inspector General on the Department of Justice's guidelines for FBI investigations stated,
"Attorneys General and FBI leadership have uniformly agreed that the Attorney General Guidelines
are necessary and desirable, and they have referred to the FBI's adherence to the Attorney General
Guidelines as the reason why the FBI should not be subjected to a general legislative charter or
to statutory control over the exercise of some of its most intrusive authorities. "
"... Still peddling the 4GW snake oil . . . Would there even be an ISIS without the support of Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Turkey, Israel . . . or without the Bush administration having destroyed the Iraqi state? ..."
"... 4GW is a mantra used rather ineffectively to obscure the obvious reality of our own strategic dysfunctions . . . replacing the establishment leadership only takes care of part of the problem, and perhaps not even the worst part, which imo is conceptual . . . connected with having followed Mr. Lind and Martin van Creveld down the rabbit hole notion of the "Transformation of War" . . . ..."
"... I understand you have to generate content on a regular basis, and a conservative publication should at least try to find the silver linings in a Trump presidency, but you have provided me with very little foundation for why all of these (ostensibly good) things would come to pass because of President Donald J. Trump. ..."
"... Enjoy the dream while it lasts, Mr. Lind. But be prepared for a rude awakening. Anyone who thinks that Trump will have a positive influence on any aspect of American governance needs to have his head examined, and probably to have it replaced. ..."
"... Most Trump supporters hope for negative accomplishments, catharsis: firings and prosecutions of elite miscreants, ending immigration and deporting illegals, getting out of the Middle East, beating down the GOP establishment and, with it, great swathes of Leviathan. ..."
"... Both sides aren't seeing their candidate as being great. They just see the other side as an absolute disaster. ..."
Still peddling the 4GW snake oil . . . Would there even be an ISIS without the support of
Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Turkey, Israel . . . or without the Bush administration having
destroyed the Iraqi state?
4GW is a mantra used rather ineffectively to obscure the obvious reality of our own strategic
dysfunctions . . . replacing the establishment leadership only takes care of part of the problem,
and perhaps not even the worst part, which imo is conceptual . . . connected with having followed
Mr. Lind and Martin van Creveld down the rabbit hole notion of the "Transformation of War" . .
It's tempting to project your preferences onto Trump because there's so much blank space there
in terms of policy, but Trump has in no way committed to firing half of our general officers,
or a "housecleaning" that takes away enough money from the Pentagon to fund a major infrastructure
program in its own right, or cancelling any weapons system currently under development.
This is all wishful thinking, even without considering what Congress would do. I understand
you have to generate content on a regular basis, and a conservative publication should at least
try to find the silver linings in a Trump presidency, but you have provided me with very little
foundation for why all of these (ostensibly good) things would come to pass because of President
Donald J. Trump.
I wish it were as simple as waltzing about the Pentagon saying "You're Fired!" There's good reasoning
in the essay with which I agree; Trump seems to have the better instincts to deal with Pentagon
Inc, particularly when Option 2 is Hillary.
But. How does one reform an inherently unreformable institution? How to overcome a system
rigged with flag officers and SES bureaucrats that were groomed for their true-belief in the military-industrial
complex? Maybe I'm just the eternal pessimist, but knowing the Pentagon culture firsthand, I see
zero chance at a "businessman-led housecleaning of the U.S. military.
"4GW does not justify big-ticket programs such as the F-35 fighter/bomber and its trillion-dollar
I would go further and say nothing justifies the F-35. Because of its expense, it is not mass
producible, and therefore not suitable for a conventional war either. The cost/aircraft would
come down with mass production, but it would still be too expensive and slow to mass produce in
an all-out conventional war. It would be kind of like an aerial tiger tank.
Enjoy the dream while it lasts, Mr. Lind. But be prepared for a rude awakening. Anyone who
thinks that Trump will have a positive influence on any aspect of American governance needs to
have his head examined, and probably to have it replaced.
William S. Lind contrasts Trump and Clinton with respect to Pentagon reform:
Trump: "Because Trump is anti-establishment, military reform would at least be a possibility
.Trump is a businessman. Businessmen do not like wasting money. They want efficiency. They cut
bloated staffs, fire incompetent executives, and get rid of unnecessary contractors."
Clinton: On the other hand, "So long as the establishment is in power, it [reform ] is not
[possible]. In defense as in everything else, establishment leadership means more of the same.
In the case of Hillary Clinton that mean[s] more wasted money."
Lind also contrasts Trump and Clinton with respect to American interventionism:
Trump: "He has repeatedly questioned American interventionism. He roundly condemned the idiotic
and disastrous Iraq War, which suggests he would rather not repeat the experience. Of equal importance,
he has called for repairing our relationship with Russia."
Clinton: A Hillary Clinton presidency "means more wars, wars we will lose. Hillary is a wild-eyed
interventionist. She gave us the Libyan fiasco, and had Obama been fool enough to listen to her
again, we would now be at war on the ground in Syria."
However – on reading further in the Lind article – it becomes apparent that Lind's argument
is not so much with endless American military interventionism as it is with the targets of endless
"The Pentagon pretends its future is war against other states The establishment refuses to
compel our military to focus on war against non-state opponents, or Fourth Generation war Might
a Trump administration see the need for an alliance of all states against non-state forces?"
In other words, Lind proposes to merely redirect the current endless American military interventions
away from existing nation states and towards non-state forces. Lind doesn't simply want to work
with other states on a case-by-case basis when it is in the US national interest to do so - rather
he wants a new "grand strategy" of an open-ended world-wide alliance with other states against
non-state forces. Lind doesn't want to put a stop to endless American military interventionism,
but instead to concentrate on a new kind of endless American interventionism.
An additional point of concern in the Lind article: In asking "Might a Trump administration
see the need for an alliance of all states against non-state forces?" Lind writes: "Here we have
a clue: Trump has chosen as a defense advisor-the rumor mill says shadow secretary of defense-retired
Army general Michael Flynn. It was an excellent choice."
Two reference articles show why Michael Flynn would not be an "excellent choice"at all: First,
in Flynn's own words on July 9th op-ed in The New York Post:
Wishful thinking, Mr. Lind even if Trump could with the election and try to make the changes you
envision. Truth be told, America is now govern by the "Deep State" of which the MIC is major part
of. Also, the MIC is not the least interested in ending any of these interventions wars as that
would negatively impact their "gravy train".
I agree that we may be projecting our wishful thinking on Trump, but what is the alternative?
Faced with a choice between a known bad apple and an apple that gives some vague hope, it is rational
to bet on the second. Especially given that it is hard to imagine an apple more rotten than HRC,
so our downside risk is limited too.
PS I was always willing to give pres. Obama a bit of a free pass because of his refusal to
implicate us any deeper in the conflicts in Syria and Ukraine. I figured the atrocity of Yemen
and blunders elsewhere (Iraq, Afghanistan, relationship with SA and Turkey, the lack of resolve
to draw an even clearer line in the sand on Syria, Libya, and Ukraine) were the norm given the
neocon-infested foreign policy apparatus, and at least he was putting up SOME resistance. Sadly,
that resounding endorsement of HRC blew it all up, he has fallen in line and we are in for some
more GW-Cheney-style insanity should she prevail. Whatever respect I had for him is now gone.
I was hoping he'd try to setup things so that the resistance to the neocon insanity and jingoism
would grow further, not fall back, as the choice of HRC clearly indicates.
"Anyone who thinks that Trump will have a positive influence on any aspect of American governance
needs to have his head examined, and probably to have it replaced."
"Positive influence" is all well and good, but we're in slow motion collapse, and it's beside
Most Trump supporters hope for negative accomplishments, catharsis: firings and prosecutions
of elite miscreants, ending immigration and deporting illegals, getting out of the Middle East,
beating down the GOP establishment and, with it, great swathes of Leviathan.
I have no idea what the Clinton supporters hope for. More abortions? More government jobs?
More immigrants? More gay weddings and transwhatever toilets? More dead Americans and Middle Easterners?
More Wall Street bailouts? More foreign dictators and more taxpayer money to put them on the US
payroll? They probably aren't thinking "more money and power for the Clintons", "more recklessness
and irresponsibility", or "more scandal and embarrassment", even though that's about all they'll
While it's true this is wishful thinking, one just needs to remember the alternative. It is as
certain as anything can be in this life that with Clinton we will rush full speed ahead into more
of the same disasters. Trump is bad, but worse than the status quo? That's hard to imagine. Flynn,
though, seems to be another neocon nut, though I'm open to any contrary evidence.
I wish it were otherwise, but I don't even think that Trump is a serious candidate. He's done
nothing to encourage his supporters, taken little to no advantage of Clinton's obvious shortcomings,
and everything to provide ammunition to Clinton's legions of delusional 'liberal' fascists. This
is not a Donald who wants to win.
"Trump is a businessman. Businessmen do not like wasting money. They want efficiency. They cut
bloated staffs, fire incompetent executives, and get rid of unnecessary contractors."
Here's how Trump runs his businesses, he incurs enormous debts by grossly overpaying for whatever
new toy he wants. Then he incurs more debt to pay himself and his family large salaries or to
pay off his personal debts. He also wastes money on the gaudy, unnecessary and tasteless "improvements"
to his purchases(small e.g., gold plated fixtures in the Trump Shuttle bathrooms). Then, he doesn't
pay contractors for the work they performed. And, when it all goes belly-up he leaves his foolish
investors or the banks holding the bag (i.e., the enormous debt).
More simply, going by his business record Trump actually loves debt, incompetence, overspending
and obscene waste.
Trump dug his grave when he delved into xenophobia and ethnic chauvinism.His ranting about Mexicans
and Muslims and now his new Nixonian slogan of being a tough law and order president has given
enough ammunition to the Democrats to trounce him coming next election.
I think Lind is proof of the triumph of hope over reality here; either that or that there is a
sucker born every minute. I think some important facts about Flynn are missed here. Here is a
statement he made to Hugh Hewitt:
"Last, I'm going to just touch on Russia and Iran briefly. Both of these countries, I deal
with in my book, because these are allies of radical Islamism, and most people don't know how
they are interacting with each other. So I just wanted to touch on that."
Today, July 12th, his book with Michael Ledeen as co-author, Field of Fight, was released.
In Flynn's own words:
"Yet, the alliance exists, and we've already dithered for many years.
The war is on. We face a working coalition that extends from North Korea and China to Russia,
Iran, Syria, Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. We are under attack, not only from nation
states, but also from al Qaeda, Hezbollah, ISIS, and countless other terrorist groups. Suffice
to say, the same sort of cooperation binds together jihadis, Communists, and garden-variety
Flynn isn't an antidote to Hilary Clinton; they're equals in madness.
I wouldn't even now bet on Trump being the Republican nominee - the Republican establishment may
well prefer to be trounced rather than elect Trump. Look for them to give Trump the kind of "support"
a rope gives a hanged man, or to change the rules so they can select another nominee, or a combination
of both. Paul Ryan has been making noises about allowing delegates to vote their conscience on
the 1st ballot, allowing nervous Trump delegates to jump ship. All it would take is a meeting
of GOP Rules Committee, which happens just before the convention. And this is a senator who has
"endorsed" Trump, even if he has also called him a "racist."
"Maintaining a wobbly status quo. You'll see no grand visions of anything from HRC"
Sadly I think that IS what's expected. Similar to how Trump voters don't see him so much as
doing great things as much as "80% chance of failure is better than 100%", Hillary voters see
it as more "keeping the plane slightly tilted down being better than blowing the plane up with
Both sides aren't seeing their candidate as being great. They just see the other side as
an absolute disaster.
I'll be honest, given what the GOP was giving up as alternatives and assuming that Sanders
didn't have a chance in hades, Trump/Hillary was, to me, the best outcome out of the primaries.
I don't support Trump but I'd take him over Rubio or Bush.
Though note that at this point 8 years ago, I was saying "oh, Obama vs McCain. Either way,
I'm happy." Then the general election campaign kicked in and I stopped being happy over the latter
Sort of worried I'll see the same here, and if the rumors about Trump's shift are true, then
I think that's exactly what I'll be seeing.
Dec 18, 2015 Donald Trump Is The Establishment Candidate
While his rise in the polls is attributed to his challenging the establishment and the political
status quo, let's look at the many ways Donald Trump, when it comes to his political positions,
represents that very same status quo. From the Fed, to war, to civil liberties, the "anti-establishment"?
Trump takes no positions not already endorsed by the establishment.
"... Chaffetz confirmed that Flynn had failed to reveal the more than $45,000 he was paid to speak at a 2015 gala for RT, the Kremlin-run TV network, as well as the money he was paid by an air freight company and a cybersecurity firm with direct connections to Russia. Chaffetz added that the White House had refused to provide his committee with information and documents related to Flynn's security clearance and payments from organizations tied to the Russian and Turkish governments. The committee made six requests, and the White House cited reasons it could not comply with each of them, Cummings said. ..."
"... ... $45K? ... lol ... Therapist Bill makes multiple-times more in birthday-bribes from desert ragheads and <nudge-wink> so-called "speeches" ... then smiles into his retirement sunset villa at (((Epstein's))) Isla Lolita ... ..."
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn likely broke the law by failing to disclose foreign
income he earned from Russia and Turkey , the heads of the House Oversight Committee said Tuesday.
As The Washington Post reports, committee chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and ranking member
Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said they believe Flynn neither received permission nor fully disclosed income
he earned for a speaking engagement in Russia and lobbying activities on behalf of Turkey when he
applied to reinstate his security clearance, after viewing two classified memos and Flynn's disclosure
form in a private briefing Tuesday morning.
"Personally I see no evidence or no data to support the notion that General Flynn complied with
the law," Chaffetz told reporters following the briefing.
"He was supposed to get permission, he was supposed to report it, and he didn't," Cummings said.
Chaffetz confirmed that Flynn had failed to reveal the more than $45,000 he was paid to speak
at a 2015 gala for RT, the Kremlin-run TV network, as well as the money he was paid by an air freight
company and a cybersecurity firm with direct connections to Russia. Chaffetz added that the White
House had refused to provide his committee with information and documents related to Flynn's security
clearance and payments from organizations tied to the Russian and Turkish governments. The committee
made six requests, and the White House cited reasons it could not comply with each of them, Cummings
One has to wonder about the Trump team's vetting process and perhaps more notable is that
now that Chaffetz is not running for re-election, he has nothing to fear from political fallout from
the White House or GOP in general.
... $45K? ... lol ... Therapist Bill makes multiple-times more in birthday-bribes from
desert ragheads and <nudge-wink> so-called "speeches" ... then smiles into his retirement sunset
villa at (((Epstein's))) Isla Lolita ...
... and while "Flynn had failed to reveal the more than $45,000 he was paid to speak at a 2015
gala for RT, the Kremlin-run TV network", the Kremlin-friendly Klinton Krime Kartel gets to pocket
more bribes while the Hilarious one, who was SoS for Obumboclot, was able to negotiate a Kremlin-reset-deal
to "give" the UraniumOne mines to the Kremlin ... and gets away with it ... go figure ...
>>> "Doesn't make one iota of difference as the Criminal Fraud UNITED STATES, CORP. INC. is
absolutely & completely....Lawless. "
... exactly, @Chupacabra ...
... and while CONgress wastes their time on piddly-little $45K, Kremlin-&-Washington-friend
Turkey (who had been allegedly one of Flynn's sources of "no-no" funds), had been supplying "moderate"
terrorists with "flour bags" full of C4 explosives ...
>>> "Syrian Army Finds Turkish 'Flour' Bags Full of C4 - Turkey has been caught before using
humanitarian pretexts to smuggle weapons into Syria"
... "... claimed that the cargo of the lorries were a 'national secret' " ... LOL!
And doubtless up next after them is Obama on 1) his using US intel to spy on opposition during
an election, and 2) the demonstrably fraudulent birth certificate he trotted out several years
back in response to Trump's barking at him.
ponders how many other politicians, serving or sacked, have failed to disclose payments received
from the dmedia, or apartheid regimes like Israel, or from libtard snowflake universities like
Berkeley, or ngo companies like those run by soros or russian uranium companies to the dems/clinton
does this mean there are another 435 + 100 + 1 + 7 investigations pending for those currently
(and their current aides_ serving AND another 800 investigations for ex-politicians and aides
to those politicians
DRAIN THE SWAMP has now morphed into thr need for an independent body to do the investigations
into corruption, since self policing just reverts to "neener neener" finger pointing like it's
some kind of political game.
grand jury supported by a team of current/ex-fbi sleuths?
Chaffetz is burned out and is leaving. Or maybe he's getting out of Dodge before revelations
of his own. In any case, his statements and assertions are becoming increasingly erratic.
Since the Flynn talk in Russia occurred in 2015, and Flynn's private lobbying work related
to Turkey was for a private company based in the Netherlands, the critical definitions here would
be the extent to which these businesses are "tied to" the Russian and Turkish governments. Nothing
comes of it.
This case showcases the complete corruption of Capitol Hill. Flynn is getting fucked while
HRC, the Clinton Foundation and associated crooks and liars get a free ride. BURN IT DOWN! Rotten
to the core and that includes Trump.
Said it before and will say it again. The political assassination of General Flynn is a travesty.
When this is all over, he won't be charged with anything, because there is nothing to charge.
At best, anything he is accused of doing is an administrative/security issue, not criminal, and
most of the accusations--like violating the law in talking to the Russian Ambassador--are nonsense.
This is just endless hyperbole from politicians trying to smear General Flynn so they can,
by association, smear the President. If President Trump left office tomorrow, the press would
never utter the words "General Michael Flynn" again.
And when the dust settles, how does General Flynn, an American patriot, who served 34 years
in the US Army protecting this country, get his good name back? How does he get back the respect
he earned over a lifetime?
"... "The Senate Intelligence Committee turned down the request by former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's lawyer for a grant of immunity in exchange for his testimony, two congressional sources told NBC News" [NBC]. ..."
"The Senate Intelligence Committee turned down the request by former
National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's lawyer for a grant of immunity in
exchange for his testimony, two congressional sources told NBC News" [NBC].
So what's the over/under on this?
My speculation is Flynn doesn't have anything to say about Trump. He just
doesn't want to have the Logan act hanging over his head. But if he's got
nothing to contribute, that means Flynn is more valuable to anti-Trump forces
if he doesn't open his mouth – gotta keep the other narratives going.
"... When Gen. Michael Flynn was forced to resign as national-security advisor, Bill Kristol purred his satisfaction, "If it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state." ..."
"... To Kristol, the permanent regime, not the elected president and his government, is the real defender and rightful repository of our liberties. Yet it was this regime, the deep state, that carried out what Eli Lake of Bloomberg calls "The Political Assassination of Michael Flynn." ..."
"... In December, when Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats, Flynn spoke to the Russian ambassador. He apparently counseled the envoy not to overreact, saying a new team would be in place in a few weeks and would review U.S.-Russian relations. ..."
"... But apparently, this did not sit well with the deep state. For when Vice President Pence told a TV show that Flynn told him that sanctions did not come up in conversation with the Russian ambassador, a transcript of Flynn's call was produced from recordings by intelligence agencies, and its contents leaked to the Washington Post . ..."
"... The real crime here, however, is not that the incoming national-security advisor spoke with a Russian diplomat seeking guidance on the future president's thinking. The real crime is the criminal conspiracy inside the deep state to transcribe the private conversation of a U.S. citizen and leak it to press collaborators to destroy a political career. ..."
"... But the deep state is after larger game than General Flynn. It is out to bring down President Trump and abort any move to effect the sort of rapprochement with Russia that Ronald Reagan achieved. ..."
"... Purpose: stampede the White House into abandoning any idea of a detente with Russia. And it appears to be working. At a White House briefing Tuesday, Sean Spicer said, "President Trump has made it very clear that he expects the Russian government to return Crimea." ..."
"... Patrick J. Buchanan is a founding editor of ..."
"... and the author of the book ..."
"... What has become obvious to me is that the United States government is operating as any regime which fears it's people (but does not fear them enough) operates. ..."
"... They drum up fears of an outside enemy. In this case, it's Russia. If they succeed, then they can subvert the will of the people as expressed through an elected President. They can prevent peace and prosperity for the benefit of the few who hold power through, as we have seen, blackmail. Trump should pardon Snowden and start firing upper level management in any intelligence agency that behaves insubordinately. They serve at the President's pleasure with Congressional oversight on their activities and bureaucrats need to be reminded of this, frequently. In this case, the record of these intelligence agencies renders the argument that we can't afford to lose the expertise these people represent is moot. Elected officials must take precedence over unelected functionaries and intelligence agencies do not have any business in determining policy. ..."
When Gen. Michael Flynn was forced to resign as national-security advisor, Bill Kristol purred
his satisfaction, "If it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state."
To Kristol, the permanent regime, not the elected president and his government, is the real
defender and rightful repository of our liberties. Yet it was this regime, the deep state, that carried
out what Eli Lake of Bloomberg calls "The Political Assassination of Michael Flynn."
And what were Flynn's offenses?
In December, when Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats, Flynn spoke to the Russian ambassador.
He apparently counseled the envoy not to overreact, saying a new team would be in place in a few
weeks and would review U.S.-Russian relations.
"That's neither illegal nor improper," writes Lake. Vladimir Putin swiftly declared that there
would be no reciprocal expulsions and U.S. diplomats and their families would be welcome at the Kremlin's
Christmas and New Year's parties. Diplomatic crisis averted. "Great move (by V. Putin)," tweeted
Trump, "I always knew he was very smart."
But apparently, this did not sit well with the deep state. For when Vice President Pence told
a TV show that Flynn told him that sanctions did not come up in conversation with the Russian ambassador,
a transcript of Flynn's call was produced from recordings by intelligence agencies, and its contents
leaked to the Washington Post .
After seeing the transcript, the White House concluded that Flynn had misled Pence, mutual trust
was gone, and Flynn must go. Like a good soldier, Flynn took the bullet.
The real crime here, however, is not that the incoming national-security advisor spoke with
a Russian diplomat seeking guidance on the future president's thinking. The real crime is the criminal
conspiracy inside the deep state to transcribe the private conversation of a U.S. citizen and leak
it to press collaborators to destroy a political career.
"This is what police states do," writes Lake.
But the deep state is after larger game than General Flynn. It is out to bring down President
Trump and abort any move to effect the sort of rapprochement with Russia that Ronald Reagan achieved.
For the deep state is deeply committed to Cold War II.
Hence, suddenly, we read reports of a Russian spy ship off the Connecticut, Delaware, and Virginia
coasts, of Russian jets buzzing a U.S. warship in the Black Sea, and Russian violations of Reagan's
INF treaty outlawing intermediate-range missiles in Europe.
Purpose: stampede the White House into abandoning any idea of a detente with Russia. And it
appears to be working. At a White House briefing Tuesday, Sean Spicer said, "President Trump has
made it very clear that he expects the Russian government to return Crimea."
Is the White House serious?
Putin could no more survive returning Crimea to Ukraine than Bibi Netanyahu could survive giving
East Jerusalem back to Jordan.
How does the deep state go about its work? We have seen a classic example with Flynn. The intelligence
and investigative arms of the regime dig up dirt, and then move it to their Fourth Estate collaborators,
who enjoy First Amendment immunity to get it out.
For violating their oaths and breaking the law, bureaucratic saboteurs are hailed as "whistleblowers"
while the journalists who receive the fruits of their felonies put in for Pulitzers.
Now if Russians hacked into the DNC and John Podesta's computer during the campaign, and, more
seriously, if Trump aides colluded in any such scheme, it should be investigated.
But we should not stop there. Those in the FBI, Justice Department, and intelligence agencies
who were complicit in a conspiracy to leak the contents of Flynn's private conversations in order
to bring down the national-security advisor should be exposed and prosecuted.
An independent counsel should be appointed by the attorney general and a grand jury impaneled
to investigate what Trump himself rightly calls "criminal" misconduct in the security agencies.
As for interfering in elections, how clean are our hands?
Our own CIA has a storied history of interfering in elections. In the late '40s, we shoveled cash
into France and Italy after World War II to defeat the communists who had been part of the wartime
resistance to the Nazis and fascists.
And we succeeded. But we continued these practices after the Cold War ended. In this century,
our National Endowment for Democracy, which dates to the Reagan era, has backed "color revolutions"
and "regime change" in nations across what Russia regards as her "near abroad."
NED's continued existence appears a contradiction of Trump's inaugural declaration: "We do not
seek to impose our way of life on anyone."
The president and GOP should get out front here. Let Congress investigate Russia meddling in our
election. And let a special prosecutor run down, root out, expose, and indict those in the investigative
and intel agencies who used their custody of America's secrets, in collusion with press collaborators,
to take down Trump appointees who are on their enemies lists.
Hi – I agree with all you say. As an Australian citizen, I am outraged that the conversation between
my Prime Minister and your President was leaked. This leak occurred from within the White House.
There were reportedly four people from the Donald Trump admin who were on line. So yes, deep state
boogey stuff is sexy, who among the reported President's team – Steve Bannon, Sean Spicer, Michael
Flynn or God forbid the president himself leaked? No deep state involvement in a call with the
only ally that has fought all wars with the USA since WW2 right?
"The real crime is the criminal conspiracy inside the deep state "
Mr. Buchanan could have written this in his piece "Hillary's High Crimes and Misdemeanors"
published just a few short months ago in reference to leaks from the FBI. In that case, for Buchanan,
"the people have a right to know." Seems like a double standard to me.
Seems like he is just a partisan as politicians who complained about the FBI leaks.
With regard to making leaks public, I think Buchanan's comments about Hillary are as true for
Trump. "Indeed, it would seem imperative that FBI Director James Comey, even if it violates protocol
and costs him his job, state publicly whether what Baier's FBI sources are telling him is false
I personally think that if Trump has conflicts of interest and can be subject to Russian pressure,
the public deserves to know. And as Buchanan suggests, the leakers should take the consequences.
Why did Trump not chose transparency and release his Tax Returns and why did he not choose the
public's interest and divest himself of his business holdings?
What the sniping comments here ignore is context. This is not about just matters of correct process
and form - to which it is easy to respond sarcastically to the Trump objections: it's about starting
or stopping Cold War II. And let's not forget, Cold War II increases the dangers of the hot kind,
which could be quite unpleasant.
One correction. It is not just about Putin's government, as Mr. Buchanan states. Despite fond
dreams inside NED, no conceivable Russian government will 'give back' Crimea - that is, short
of WWIII - or, as an outside possibility, the establishment of a neutral zone after the dissolution
of NATO and the reordering of the international system.
Ben Stone, Seriously? Boy, you lived in a whole different country 4 months ago than I did.
What has become obvious to me is that the United States government is operating as any
regime which fears it's people (but does not fear them enough) operates.
They drum up fears of an outside enemy. In this case, it's Russia. If they succeed, then
they can subvert the will of the people as expressed through an elected President. They can prevent
peace and prosperity for the benefit of the few who hold power through, as we have seen, blackmail.
Trump should pardon Snowden and start firing upper level management in any intelligence agency
that behaves insubordinately. They serve at the President's pleasure with Congressional oversight
on their activities and bureaucrats need to be reminded of this, frequently. In this case, the
record of these intelligence agencies renders the argument that we can't afford to lose the expertise
these people represent is moot. Elected officials must take precedence over unelected functionaries
and intelligence agencies do not have any business in determining policy.
Seriously, I didn't vote for the guy, but Trump is not the one we need to worry about when
it comes to taking away our liberty. If a President can be brought to heel through tactics like
this by unelected bureaucrats then we officially live in a police state.
You make a category error. Hillary Clinton was not an sitting President at the times those
leaks were made. Donald Trump is. That makes a very real difference. If you leaked information
about a vice president of the company that employed you in an attempt to get him fired and embarrass
your CEO, then you should be fired for insubordination.
The media and Deep State's obsession with Russia, and desire to fan the flames of war with Russia,
is truly mystifying and terrifying. Why are they so obsessed with Russia, and acting as if Russia
were still an enemy and we were still in the midst of the Cold War?
We have more in common with Russia than not, and should work together to promote common interests,
particularly in combating ISIS and radical Islam. Russia and Eastern Europe in general are also
at the forefront of fighting against the US & Western European liberal monoculture consensus that
dominates US & EU media and policy-making elites. On Russia policy Trump's instincts are right,
but I fear the Deep State and some of his own advisors are doing their best to undermine those
instincts and promote conflict. How else could one make sense of Spicer's idiotic comment the
other day that the President expects Russia to give back the Crimea? One can make an historical
case that not only the Crimea but all of the Ukraine should be part of Russia, but that is not
our problem and we need to stay out of it and focus on areas of agreement where we can make common
cause with Russia.
Flynn definitely was compromised deliberately, because he just spoke with Russian ambassador as a private person (but may be on
instructions from Trump) and then understanding that lied to the vice president. So releasing his conversations was a part "color revolution"
against Trump, launched by neocons in intelligence services. As for the role of Jews in this affair is is naive to consider neocons
to be purely ethnically based, although "Israel firster" are an important part of them. So in Fred C. Dobbs post below one needs
to replace "Jew" with "Neocon" in Nixon's remarks. You will instantly see the point and it is difficlut nt to agree with Nixon that
neocons influence is huge threat to the USA. In this sense Nixon proved again that his was very talented, pretty shred politician...
"... Looks like "Color revolution" came to the USA and you being the US citizen better to learn what it means. And it means a lot (among other things that means an immediate end of remnants of democracy left; Welcome to the USSR, in other words.) ..."
"... Tom Clancy eat your heart out, this is as real as Dennis Kucinitch describes it as. The sinister globalist elite will stop at nothing in establishing their Luciferian dreams of the Novus Ordo Seclorum (New World Order). ..."
"... The old Elites need conflicts, so they can keep power. ..."
"... Yep. Trillion dollar military industrial complex is a lot of motivation for the establishment to revive the cold war and to keep the IC involved in the Saudi's proxy war via ISIS in the middle east. The CIA isn't interested in peace. It wants power. ..."
"... Yes, that appears to be their Operandi--to not only keep us distracted and our resources drained to continually feed their purses and purposes (to confiscate more wealth and usurp more power)...so, now that we are aware of this what are we doing to do to put a stop to it since we are Sovereign, and supposed to be in charge (self-governing). It appears we have not been taking our responsibility seriously and trusting our "servants" whilst they have been plotting and scheming against us. ..."
"... Trump is the last, best hope to disband the US' neolib version of the Gestapo ..."
"... if Clinton won there would never be a political opponent free from her deep state surveillance ..."
"... ... "The Jews are all over the government," Nixon complained to his chief of staff, H.R. "Bob" Haldeman, in an Oval Office meeting recorded on one of a set of White House tapes released yesterday at the National Archives. Nixon said the Jews needed to be brought under control by putting someone "in charge who is not Jewish" in key agencies. ..."
"... Washington "is full of Jews," the president asserted. "Most Jews are disloyal." He made exceptions for some of his top aides, such as national security adviser Henry Kissinger, his White House counsel, Leonard Garment, and one of his speechwriters, William Safire, and then added: ..."
"... "But, Bob, generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards. They turn on you. Am I wrong or right? ..."
"... The fact the nation's now-departed senior guardian of national security was unmoored by a scandal linked to a conversation picked up on a wire offers a rare insight into how exactly America's vaunted Deep State works. It is a story not about rogue intelligence agencies running amok outside the law, but rather about the vast domestic power they have managed to acquire within it. ..."
"... We know now that the FBI and the NSA, under their Executive Order 12333 authority and using the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as statutory cover, were actively monitoring the phone calls and reading text messages sent to and from the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak. ..."
"... Although the monitoring of any specific individual is classified TOP SECRET, and cannot be released to foreigners, the existence of this monitoring in general is something of an open secret, and Kislyak probably suspected he was under surveillance. ..."
"... The way it's supposed to work is that any time a "U.S. person" - government speak for a U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident, even a U.S. company, located here or abroad - finds his or her communications caught up in Kislyak's, the entire surveillance empire, which was designed for speed and efficiency, and which, we now know, is hard to manage, grinds to a halt. That's a good thing. Even before Snowden, of course, the FBI would "minimize" the U.S. end of a conversation if analysts determined that the calls had no relevance to a legitimate intelligence gathering purpose. A late night call to order pizza would fall into this category. ..."
"... But if the analyst listening to Kislyak's call hears someone identify himself as an agent of the U.S. government - "Hi! It's Mike Flynn" certainly qualifies - a number of things have to happen, according to the government's own rules ..."
"... At this stage, the actual audio of the call and any transcript would be considered "Raw FISA-acquired information," and its distribution would be highly restricted. At the NSA, not more than 40 or so analysts or senior managers would be read into the classification sub-sub compartment that contains it, called RAGTIME-A,B,C D or P, where each letter stands for one of five different categories of foreign intelligence. ..."
Is this Intel community trying to undermine Trump's presidency? If so congratulations ask yourself if are living in a modern incarnation
of a police state. Intelligence agencies as a pinnacle of political power == police state.
The swamp lost part of the power and fights back.
Looks like "Color revolution" came to the USA and you being the US citizen better to learn what it means. And it means
a lot (among other things that means an immediate end of remnants of democracy left; Welcome to the USSR, in other words.)
All standard tricks used to depose governments like Yanukovych in Ukraine are now played against Trump. Media dominance is
one essential part. Coordinated series of leaks is a standard scenarios.
Former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) on Gen. Michael Flynn resigning as President Trump's National Security Advisor and the
divide between the intelligence community and Trump.
"Who knows what is truth anymore. It's like a version of Mad magazine". -- Kusinich
All standard tricks used to depose governments like Yanukovych in Ukraine are now played against Trump.
Media dominance and hostility of media to the government is one essential part of any color revolution. That's what we have
now in the USA. Here is Kucinich warning:
Tom Clancy eat your heart out, this is as real as Dennis Kucinitch describes it as. The sinister globalist elite will
stop at nothing in establishing their Luciferian dreams of the Novus Ordo Seclorum (New World Order). Death to the Globalist/Islamic/Leftist
alliance. Deus Vult!
In 2009, the Haitian parliament voted unanimously to raise the minimum wage, up to 61 cents per hour. US-based multinational
textile corporations such as Hanes and Levi's objected, claiming that paying these workers slightly more would cut into their
profits. As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton intervened and pressured Haiti to back off - blocking the raise. We only know
about this from WikiLeaks.
How on Earth is that something a communist would do? Communists want workers to unite and fire their bosses. Communists
want the workers to run the factories. How on God's green Earth does a Communist - who wants the workers to directly control
the means of production - intervene to block a tiny wage increase for those same workers.
Calling corporate Democrats like Clinton and Obama "communist" and "socialist" is so mindbogglingly stupid that I don't
even know how to respond to someone so blinded by partisanship.
See: The Young Hegelians . CRONY Totalitarian "Communism" is the Goal, and the Minions are screaming for it , in their estrogen
soaked , Marxist indoctrinated IDIOCY.
Trump needs to drain the swamp on the Intel community
The old Elites need conflicts, so they can keep power.
Yep. Trillion dollar military industrial complex is a lot of motivation for the establishment to revive the cold war
and to keep the IC involved in the Saudi's proxy war via ISIS in the middle east. The CIA isn't interested in peace. It wants
Yes, that appears to be their Operandi--to not only keep us distracted and our resources drained to continually feed
their purses and purposes (to confiscate more wealth and usurp more power)...so, now that we are aware of this what are we
doing to do to put a stop to it since we are Sovereign, and supposed to be in charge (self-governing). It appears we have not
been taking our responsibility seriously and trusting our "servants" whilst they have been plotting and scheming against us.
In Nixon's day, the Deep State was all about 'Jews in the Guv'mint'. Not gonna happen on Trump's watch, not yet anyway, so that's
something. Now, it's 'Progressives', presumably. Call them NeoLiberals if you like.
... "The Jews are all over the government," Nixon complained to his chief of staff, H.R. "Bob" Haldeman, in an Oval
Office meeting recorded on one of a set of White House tapes released yesterday at the National Archives. Nixon said the Jews
needed to be brought under control by putting someone "in charge who is not Jewish" in key agencies.
Washington "is full of Jews," the president asserted. "Most Jews are disloyal." He made exceptions for some of his top
aides, such as national security adviser Henry Kissinger, his White House counsel, Leonard Garment, and one of his speechwriters,
William Safire, and then added:
"But, Bob, generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards. They turn on you. Am I wrong or right?"
Haldeman agreed wholeheartedly. "Their whole orientation is against you. In this administration, anyway. And they are smart.
They have the ability to do what they want to do--which is to hurt us." ...
The who, what, where, and why of the Trump administration's first major scandal - Michael Flynn's ignominious resignation on
Monday as national security advisor - have all been thoroughly discussed. Relatively neglected, and deserving of far more attention,
has been the how.
The fact the nation's now-departed senior guardian of national security was unmoored by a scandal linked to a conversation
picked up on a wire offers a rare insight into how exactly America's vaunted Deep State works. It is a story not about rogue intelligence
agencies running amok outside the law, but rather about the vast domestic power they have managed to acquire within it.
We know now that the FBI and the NSA, under their Executive Order 12333 authority and using the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act as statutory cover, were actively monitoring the phone calls and reading text messages sent to and from the Russian ambassador
to the United States, Sergey Kislyak.
Although the monitoring of any specific individual is classified TOP SECRET, and cannot be released to foreigners, the
existence of this monitoring in general is something of an open secret, and Kislyak probably suspected he was under surveillance.
But a welter of laws, many of them tweaked after the Snowden revelations, govern the distribution of any information that is
acquired by such surveillance. And this is where it's highly relevant that this scandal was started by the public leaking of information
about Mike Flynn's involvement in the monitoring of Kisylak.
The way it's supposed to work is that any time a "U.S. person" - government speak for a U.S. citizen, lawful permanent
resident, even a U.S. company, located here or abroad - finds his or her communications caught up in Kislyak's, the entire surveillance
empire, which was designed for speed and efficiency, and which, we now know, is hard to manage, grinds to a halt. That's a good
thing. Even before Snowden, of course, the FBI would "minimize" the U.S. end of a conversation if analysts determined that the
calls had no relevance to a legitimate intelligence gathering purpose. A late night call to order pizza would fall into this category.
But if the analyst listening to Kislyak's call hears someone identify himself as an agent of the U.S. government - "Hi!
It's Mike Flynn" certainly qualifies - a number of things have to happen, according to the government's own rules
At this stage, the actual audio of the call and any transcript would be considered "Raw FISA-acquired information," and
its distribution would be highly restricted. At the NSA, not more than 40 or so analysts or senior managers would be read into
the classification sub-sub compartment that contains it, called RAGTIME-A,B,C D or P, where each letter stands for one of five
different categories of foreign intelligence.
For anything out of the ordinary - and, again, Flynn's status qualifies - the head of the National Security Division would
be notified, and he or she would bring the raw FISA transcript to FBI Director James Comey or his deputy. Then, the director and
his deputy would determine whether to keep the part of the communication that contained Flynn's words. The NSA has its own procedures
for determining whether to destroy or retain the U.S. half of an intercepted communication.
In this case, there were three sets of communications between Flynn and Kislyak, at least one of which is a text message. The
first occurs on Dec. 18. The last occurs on Dec. 30, a day after sanctions were levied against people that the Russian ambassador
knew - namely, spies posing as diplomats.
The factors FBI Director Comey and his deputy would have had to consider in this case are complex. Flynn was a former senior
intelligence official not in power at the time of the communications, though he did have an interim security clearance. Then there
was the policy context: The United States wanted to know why Russia decided not to retaliate, according to the Washington Post.
(Justice Department warned White House that
Flynn could be vulnerable to Russian blackmail,
officials say https://wpo.st/fthc2 Feb 13)
But the most important factor would have been that Flynn was talking to the ambassador of a country who has been credibly accused
of interfering in the election of his boss. Regardless of the content of Flynn's side of the call, it would be negligent if the
FBI decided to minimize, or ignore, these calls, simply because Flynn is a citizen who is not subject to surveillance himself.
But what Flynn said in the calls would have played a role in the FBI's determination to keep the transcripts unminimized - a fancy
way of saying "unredacted."
The Justice Department would then decide whether to pursue the matter further. If they thought Flynn was acting as an agent
of a foreign government - and there's not a gram of evidence for this - they could apply for a normal surveillance warrant under
Title III of the U.S. code.
It is rare for the FBI or NSA to distribute raw, unminimized FISA material outside of controlled channels. But given the intelligence
questions at stake, they would have had an obligation to circulate the Flynn transcripts to the National Security Council, which,
during most of January, was peopled with President Obama's staff and detailees from other government agencies.
Sometime before January 12, the fact that these conversations had occurred was disclosed to David Ignatius, who wrote about
them. That day, Sean Spicer asked Flynn about them. Flynn denied that the sanctions were discussed. A few days later, on January
16, Vice President Mike Pence repeated Flynn's assurances to him that the calls were mostly about the logistics of arranging further
calls when Trump was President.
At this moment, we are four days away from Trump's inauguration. The FBI agents and analysts who monitored the calls, as well
as some NSC officials in the Obama administration, along with a few senior Justice Department attorneys, all knew with certainty
that the content of the calls contradicted Flynn's account of them. The transcript of the Dec. 30 call proved as much.
For reasons unclear to us, the FBI director, James Comey, did not believe that Flynn's misrepresentations amounted to a sufficient
national security risk on January 16 to spring FBI investigators on the Trump team, or even on Flynn. Perhaps he felt that doing
so right before the inauguration would have been too unseemly.
But he did want to know more. In an extraordinary turn, agents were sent to the White House to interview Flynn just a few days
after Trump was sworn in, according to the New York Times. We don't know what they learned. But by January 26, Comey had dropped
his objections to notifying the White House. (In the interim, Sean Spicer was asked about the calls again, and repeated the Flynn
Acting attorney general Sally Yates informed the White House counsel, Don McGahn, that their account of what Flynn said did
not match what Flynn insisted he said.
McGahn had the clearance to see the transcript, but it's fair to assume that many members of Trump's team probably did not.
But that does not explain why it took 11 days for Vice President Pence, who certainly did have such clearance, to learn about
the Justice Department warning. And it does not explain what the White House was doing as it mulled over this information for
Here we have to leave the realm of reasonable conjecture, but the best explanation might be the easiest: incompetence or ineffectiveness
from the White House counsel and an inability to foresee the real world consequences of their own decisions by White House principals.
The country's intelligence agencies, by contrast, were far more clear-sighted in the use of their prerogatives and power.
Agreed– Whitney believes that Flynn's defenestration was the end of
Trump's vaunted (around here anyway) reconciliation with Russia policy. New
National Security Advisor McMaster is a Petraeus follower, and has
repeatedly called out Russia as an aggressive power which must be contained
and deterred with US and NATO military power.
He's just an advisor. MacMaster will not make policy. But Trump is
finding out, as many presidents have before him, that to a large extent
the Pentagon runs itself. The military plans things way ahead of time. As
president it's difficult to buck heads with the PTB on foreign policy.
The best Trump may be able to do for the time being is stay out of war.
I would prefer an outright lovefest with Russia. I like their anti-GMO
policy. Maybe in a few years.
President Trump's first National Security Advisor Mike Flynn got kicked out of office for
talking with Russian officials. Such talks were completely inline with Trump's declared
policies of détente with Russia. (I agree that Flynn should have never gotten the NSA job. But
the reasons for that have nothing to do with his Russian connections.)
Allegedly Flynn did
Vice-President Pence about his talk with the Russian ambassador. But that can
not be a serious reason. The talks were rather informal, they were not transcribed. The first
call is said to have reached Flynn on vacation in the Dominican Republic. Why would a
Vice-President need to know each and every word of it?
With Flynn out, the war-on-Russia hawks, that is about everyone of the "serious people" in
Washington DC, had the second most important person out of the way that would probably hinder
They replaced him with a militaristic anti-Russian
In a 2016
speech to the Virginia
, McMaster stressed the need for the US to have "strategic vision" in
its fight against "hostile revisionist powers" - such as Russia, China, North Korea, and
Iran - that "annex territory, intimidate our allies, develop nuclear weapons, and use
proxies under the cover of modernized conventional militaries."
General McMaster, the new National Security Advisor, gets sold as a somewhat rebellious,
. When the now disgraced former General Petraeus came into
sight he was sold with the same marketing profile.
boss. McMaster is partially his creature:
He was passed over for brigadier general twice, until then-Gen. David Petraeus personally
flew back to Washington, D.C., from Iraq to chair the Army's promotion board in 2008.
When Petraeus took over in the war on Afghanistan he selected McMaster as his staff leader for
strategy. McMaster was
the White House by Senator Tom Cotton, one of the
Republican neocon war hawks.
McMaster's best known book is "
" about the way the US involved itself into the Vietnam War. McMaster criticizes
the Generals of that time for not having resisted then President Johnson's policies.
He is the
author of an Army study
on how to militarily counter Russia. McMaster is likely to
"resist" when President Trump orders him to pursue better relations with Moscow.
Trump has now been boxed in by hawkish, anti-Russian military in his cabinet and by a hawkish
Vice-President. The only ally he still may have in the White House is his consigliere Steve
the "serious people" is
his role in the NSC
. It will only recede when he is fired.
It seems to me that Trump has been rolled with the attacks on Flynn and the insertion of
McMaster into his inner circle. I wonder if he, and Bannon, recognize the same problematic
development and have a strategy against it.
But, as he details below in a letter published by
The Washington Post, he has officially resigned "to be clear, my decision had nothing to do with politics," seemingly because
the Trump Administration is "tuning out the intelligence professionals."
Nearly 15 years ago, I informed my skeptical father that I was pursuing a job with the Central Intelligence Agency. Among his
many concerns was that others would never believe I had resigned from the agency when I sought my next job. "Once CIA, always CIA,"
he said. But that didn't give me pause. This wouldn't be just my first real job, I thought then; it would be my career.
That changed when I formally resigned last week. Despite working proudly for Republican and Democratic presidents, I reluctantly
concluded that I cannot in good faith serve this administration as an intelligence professional.
This was not a decision I made lightly. I sought out the CIA as a college student, convinced that it was the ideal place to serve
my country and put an otherwise abstract international-relations degree to use. I wasn't disappointed.
The CIA taught me new skills and exposed me to new cultures and countries. More important, it instilled in me a sense of mission
and purpose. As an analyst, I became an expert in terrorist groups and traveled the world to help deter and disrupt attacks. The
administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama took the CIA's input seriously. There was no greater reward than having my analysis
presented to the president and seeing it shape events. Intelligence informing policy - this is how the system is supposed to work.
I saw that up close for the past three years at the White House, where I worked on loan from the CIA until last month.
As a candidate, Donald Trump's rhetoric suggested that he intended to take a different approach. I watched in disbelief when,
third presidential debate , Trump casually cast doubt on the high-confidence conclusion of
our 17 intelligence agencies , released that month, that Russia was behind the hacking and release of election-related emails.
On the campaign trail and even as president-elect, Trump
routinely referred to the flawed 2002 assessment of Iraq's weapons programs as proof that the CIA couldn't be trusted - even
though the intelligence community had long ago held itself to account for those mistakes and Trump
himself supported the invasion of Iraq.
Trump's actions in office have been even more disturbing. His
visit to CIA headquarters on his first full day in office, an overture designed to repair relations, was undone by his ego and
bluster. Standing in front of a memorial to the CIA's fallen officers, he seemed to be addressing the cameras and reporters in the
room, rather than the agency personnel in front of them, bragging about his inauguration crowd the previous day. Whether delusional
or deceitful, these were not the remarks many of my former colleagues and I wanted to hear from our new commander in chief. I couldn't
help but reflect on the stark contrast between the bombast of the new president and the quiet dedication of a mentor - a courageous,
dedicated professional - who is memorialized on that wall. I know others at CIA felt similarly.
The final straw came late last month, when the White House issued
a directive reorganizing the National Security Council , on whose staff I served from 2014 until earlier this year. Missing from
the NSC's principals committee were the CIA director and the director of national intelligence. Added to the roster: the president's
chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, who cut his teeth as a media champion of white nationalism.
The public outcry led the administration
to reverse course
and name the CIA director an NSC principal, but the White House's inclination was clear. It has little need for intelligence professionals
who, in speaking truth to power, might challenge the so-called "America First" orthodoxy that sees Russia as an ally and Australia
as a punching bag. That's why the president's trusted
House advisers , not career professionals, reportedly have final say over what intelligence reaches his desk.
To be clear, my decision had nothing to do with politics, and I would have been proud to again work under a Republican administration
open to intelligence analysis. I served with conviction under President George W. Bush, some of whose policies I also found troubling,
and I took part in programs that the Obama administration criticized and ended. As intelligence professionals, we're taught to tune
out politics. The river separating CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., from Washington might as well be a political moat. But this
administration has flipped that dynamic on its head: The politicians are the ones tuning out the intelligence professionals.
The CIA will continue to serve important functions - including undertaking covert action and sharing information with close allies
and partners around the globe. If this administration is serious about building trust with the intelligence community, however, it
will require more than rallies at CIA headquarters or press statements. What intelligence professionals want most is to know that
the fruits of their labor -- sometimes at the risk of life or limb - are accorded due deference in the policymaking process.
Until that happens, President Trump and his team are doing another disservice to these dedicated men and women and the nation
they proudly, if quietly, serve.
Has President Trump created an environment that cleanses itself? A self-'draining' swamp?
Notice how they're all doing the tell-all, heart-to-heart pieces at the same rags that are pushing VFN.
Also, now that it's Trump in the WH, the dissenters are all the sudden the credible ones? I'd bet even money that if Wikileaks
published something negative to the Trump admin, it would suddenly become the pinnacle of truth.
This guy was selling girl scout cookies and thought the profits were shared with the CIA because they both did good work for
humanity. After dark he was an assassin and they probably reduced his bonus per kill.
I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I
decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do...
The headline should read "Former CIA Agent Tells Us Why He's a Pathetic Loser" He left the criminal underbelly of government
so he could start a lucrative career in Fake News. I have to admit, he's off to a good start....
Doublethink is the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct
social contexts .  Doublethink is related to,
but differs from, hypocrisy and
neutrality . Also related is
cognitive dissonance , in which contradictory
beliefs cause conflict in one's mind. Doublethink is notable due to a lack of cognitive dissonance - thus the person is completely
unaware of any conflict or contradiction.
The melting snowflakes are more like a case of Cognitive Dissonance.
Sally Yates was anything but treacherous in
her final days as President Trump's acting Attorney General.
Her role as a legal canary
in the coal mine during a brief role heading the Justice Department may have poised the
White House away from National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and inspired his ousting.
Yates tried insulating the White House from a series of looming controversies - the
potentially illegal executive order banning travelers from seven predominantly Muslim
countries and the latest bombshell that Flynn misled several senior members of the Trump
administration about his suspected pre-inauguration talks with a Russian diplomat.
Despite Flynn's assurances to Vice President Mike Pence that he never discussed
dissolving Obama's sanctions against Russia, Yates informed the Trump camp in late January
that he lied and it was a violation of the Logan Act. The law prohibits private citizens
from influencing foreign government.
Additionally, Flynn was a prime target for Russian blackmail, the Washington Post
reported Yates as saying.
She wasn't alone in her thoughts. Both former CIA director John Brennan and James
Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence agreed with Yates, according to the
David Stockman provides one of
the best commentaries on Flynn assassination by deep state and Obama neocon holdovers in the administration.
This is a really powerful astute, first class analysis of the situation:
Flynn's Gone But They're Still Gunning For You, Donald
== quote ==
... ... ...
This is the real scandal as Trump himself has rightly asserted. The very idea that the already announced
#1 national security advisor to a President-elect should be subject to old-fashion "bugging," albeit
with modern day technology, overwhelmingly trumps the utterly specious Logan Act charge at the center
of the case.
As one writer for LawNewz noted regarding acting Attorney General Sally Yates' voyeuristic pre-occupation
with Flynn's intercepted conversations, Nixon should be rolling in his grave with envy:
Now, information leaks that Sally Yates knew about surveillance being conducted against potential
members of the Trump administration, and disclosed that information to others. Even Richard Nixon
didn't use the government agencies themselves to do his black bag surveillance operations. Sally
Yates involvement with this surveillance on American political opponents, and possibly the leaking
related thereto, smacks of a return to Hoover-style tactics. As writers at Bloomberg and The Week
both noted, it wreaks of 'police-state' style tactics. But knowing dear Sally as I do, it comes as
Yes, that's the same career apparatchik of the permanent government that Obama left behind to continue
the 2016 election by other means. And it's working. The Donald is being rapidly emasculated by the
powers that be in the Imperial City due to what can only be described as an audacious and self-evident
attack on Trump's Presidency by the Deep State.
Indeed, it seems that the layers of intrigue have gotten so deep and convoluted that the nominal
leadership of the permanent government machinery has lost track of who is spying on whom. Thus, we
have the following curious utterance by none other than the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee,
Rep. Devin Nunes:
'I expect for the FBI to tell me what is going on, and they better have a good answer,' he told The
Washington Post. 'The big problem I see here is that you have an American citizen who had his phone
Well, yes. That makes 324 million of us, Congressman.
But for crying out loud, surely the oh so self-important chairman of the House intelligence committee
knows that everybody is bugged. But when it reaches the point that the spy state is essentially using
its unconstitutional tools to engage in what amounts to "opposition research" with the aim of election
nullification, then the Imperial City has become a clear and present danger to American democracy
and the liberties of the American people.
As Robert Barnes of LawNewz further explained, Sally Yates, former CIA director John Brennan and
a large slice of the Never Trumper intelligence community were systematically engaged in "opposition
research" during the campaign and the transition:
According to published reports, someone was eavesdropping, and recording, the conversations of Michael
Flynn, while Sally Yates was at the Department of Justice. Sally Yates knew about this eavesdropping,
listened in herself (Pellicano-style for those who remember the infamous LA cases), and reported
what she heard to others. For Yates to have such access means she herself must have been involved
in authorizing its disclosure to political appointees, since she herself is such a political appointee.
What justification was there for an Obama appointee to be spying on the conversations of a future
Consider this little tidbit in The Washington Post . The paper, which once broke Watergate, is now
propagating the benefits of Watergate-style surveillance in ways that do make Watergate look like
a third-rate effort. (With the) FBI 'routinely' monitoring conversations of Americans...... Yates
listened to 'the intercepted call,' even though Yates knew there was 'little chance' of any credible
case being made for prosecution under a law 'that has never been used in a prosecution.'
And well it hasn't been. After all, the Logan Act was signed by President John Adams in 1799 in order
to punish one of Thomas Jefferson's supporters for having peace discussions with the French government
in Paris. That is, it amounted to pre-litigating the Presidential campaign of 1800 based on sheer
According to the Washington Post itself, that is exactly what Yates and the Obama holdovers did day
and night during the interregnum:
Indeed, the paper details an apparent effort by Yates to misuse her office to launch a full-scale
secret investigation of her political opponents, including 'intercepting calls' of her political
So all of the feigned outrage emanating from Democrats and the Washington establishment about Team
Trump's trafficking with the Russians is a cover story. Surely anyone even vaguely familiar with
recent history would have known there was absolutely nothing illegal or even untoward about Flynn's
post-Christmas conversations with the Russian Ambassador.
Indeed, we recall from personal experience the thrilling moment on inauguration day in January 1981
when word came of the release of the American hostages in Tehran. Let us assure you, that did not
happen by immaculate diplomatic conception -- nor was it a parting gift to the Gipper by the outgoing
To the contrary, it was the fruit of secret negotiations with the Iranian government during the transition
by private American citizens. As the history books would have it because it's true, the leader of
that negotiation, in fact, was Ronald Reagan's national security council director-designate, Dick
As the real Washington Post later reported, under the by-line of a real reporter, Bob Woodward:
Reagan campaign aides met in a Washington DC hotel in early October, 1980, with a self-described
'Iranian exile' who offered, on behalf of the Iranian government, to release the hostages to Reagan,
not Carter, in order to ensure Carter's defeat in the November 4, 1980 election.
The American participants were Richard Allen, subsequently Reagan's first national security adviser,
Allen aide Laurence Silberman, and Robert McFarlane, another future national security adviser who
in 1980 was on the staff of Senator John Tower (R-TX).
To this day we have not had occasion to visit our old friend Dick Allen in the US penitentiary because
he's not there; the Logan Act was never invoked in what is surely the most blatant case ever of citizen
So let's get to the heart of the matter and be done with it. The Obama White House conducted a sour
grapes campaign to delegitimize the election beginning November 9th and it was led by then CIA Director
That treacherous assault on the core constitutional matter of the election process culminated in
the ridiculous Russian meddling report of the Obama White House in December. The latter, of course,
was issued by serial liar James Clapper, as national intelligence director, and the clueless Democrat
lawyer and bag-man, Jeh Johnson, who had been appointed head of the Homeland Security Department.
Yet on the basis of the report's absolutely zero evidence and endless surmise, innuendo and "assessments",
the Obama White House imposed another round of its silly school-boy sanctions on a handful of Putin's
Of course, Flynn should have been telling the Russian Ambassador that this nonsense would be soon
But here is the ultimate folly. The mainstream media talking heads are harrumphing loudly about the
fact that the very day following Flynn's call -- Vladimir Putin announced that he would not retaliate
against the new Obama sanctions as expected; and shortly thereafter, the Donald tweeted that Putin
had shown admirable wisdom.
That's right. Two reasonably adult statesman undertook what might be called the Christmas Truce of
2016. But like its namesake of 1914 on the bloody no man's land of the western front, the War Party
has determined that the truce-makers shall not survive.
The Donald has been warned.
reports that Yates-along with former national intelligence director James Clapper Jr. and CIA
director John Brennan-told the incoming administration that "Flynn had put himself in a
compromising position" at the end of last year and was vulnerable to blackmail because of his
potentially illegal discussions of U.S. sanctions with the diplomat. (At the time of his
conversations with the Russian ambassador, he was not yet a member of the administration and so
could be in violation of the Logan Act, which prohibits private citizens from interfering in
Late on Monday, the Washington Post was the first to report that
former Atlanta U.S. Attorney Sally Yates warned Trump administration
then-national security advisor Michael Flynn had not told the truth about the nature of his
conversations with Russia's ambassador to the U.S. Yates, who at the time was the acting U.S.
attorney general, told the White House general counsel that Flynn could be vulnerable to
blackmail by the Russians.
Near the end of her short tenure at the head of the Justice
Department, Yates reportedly informed the White House that
Flynn may have misled senior officials about his calls with the Russian
ambassador, according to reports from The Post, which cited unnamed officials:
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
Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the
Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the
2016 election, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House
counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the information.
Those concerns were later echoed by James Clapper, President
Barack Obama's former director of national intelligence, and John Brennan,
the former director of the CIA
Culprit Behind Flynn Leaks Could Face Onslaught of Legal Troubles
Michael Flynn / AP
BY: Sam Dorman
February 18, 2017 8:07 pm
Whoever leaked intelligence about former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's conversation
with a Russian official could face decades of jail time if discovered.
Flynn was asked to resign as President Trump's national security adviser after he did not provide
complete information about a phone conversation he had in December with the Russian ambassador to
the U.S. The retired three-star general spoke to the ambassador about U.S. sanctions shortly
after former President Barack Obama announced them.
Trump asked Flynn to step down from his post after it became public that he misled Vice President
Mike Pence about what was discussed in the call.
U.S. intelligence officials had wiretapped the call, but the conversation did not become public
until information on it was leaked to the Washington Post by "current and former U.S. officials,"
leading Trump to call the leakers the real wrongdoers in the situation.
The people behind the leaks violated federal law by disclosing classified information about
Flynn's conversation with the Russian ambassador. That violation alone could put someone in
prison for 10 years, and force them to pay a fine, under the Espionage Act.
Flynn's phone call to the ambassador, in particular, was a form of intelligence that was "highly
classified" because it was wiretapped by U.S. intelligence officials, according to LawNewz.
Federal law could add another 10 years and a fine if the culprit(s) gave away "files" or
"physical materials"regarding the information in question. In such a situation, law 18 U.S.C. §
641 prohibits people from stealing or releasing "any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of
the United States or of any department or agency."
If discovered, those behind the leaks could also face five years in prison for lying about the
incident, either through perjury, "false statements, or covering up material facts in a federal
LawNewz noted, however, that prosecutions involving these types of laws are rare.
I think that "Joel" is some sort of 'bot unleashed on the blog. He parrots the
liberal meme of the hour or day relentlessly. And sprinkles in insults. Any IT pro
worth his salt could easily create "Joel"
February 20, 2017 12:23 am
This press conference was not actually about Trump and his dealings with Russia,
etc. It was, in a very subtle way, about the crisis of neoliberalism as an ideology.
What is really important is that subservient to neoliberals presscorps are now
viewed by large swats of the US population as traitors of the nation. Trump just
reflected this sentiment, sensing it like any good politician. This is a completely
new phenomenon and that spells troubles for neoliberals in the forthcoming elections.
The attempt to stage a color revolution (called Purple revolution by some
observers) against Trump by selective and coordinated leaking of damaging
information, actually might backfire. Actually Flynn was probably a person who
understood the mechanics involved in staging a color revolution and the role leaks
and press play in discrediting selected targets pretty well. So in some way it is
ironic that he fall as a victim of such a standard attack. Flynn downfall of course
is a success for neoliberals, no question about it, but this might be Pyrrhic
When during the press-conference Trump said "How many times do I have to answer
this question But Russia is a ruse." that was all over for the particular
presstitute who asked " Not aware of any contact during the course of the election? "
It is also unclear who will replace Flynn. It may be a person of very similar
convictions, or even more hostile to excessive size, influence and the number of the
Us intelligence agencies, and no less determined to cut them in size and reestablish
the civilian control over those agencies.
Because leakers broke the law, it is important for Trump now that they pay
personal price for this act. If Trump worth to be a President, he now needs to pay
very close attention to the finding of the source(s) of leaks and possible made out
of one of them a good example of what can happen with others, who might entertain
Just three weeks into
the Trump presidency, and his political enemies in the Washington establishment
have scored big, with the forced resignation of Trump's National Security advisor
Michael Flynn. The establishment includes state intelligence agencies and aligned
corporate news media, who have been gunning for Trump ever since his shock
election last November.
It's a hugely
damaging blow to the inner circle of the Trump White House. The US media
Flynn's resignation this week had the unmistakable air of victory-crowing. Like
sharks in a pool, they smell blood.
Flynn had to go after
and others reported that he wasn't telling the truth
about phone calls he had been holding with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak
during the transition to the Trump administration. Flynn hadn't denied the calls
in late December, but he had maintained that the subject of US sanctions on Russia
were not discussed.
Persistently the US
media did not give up on the charges against Flynn, which shows that their
confidence on the subject was underwritten by intelligence sources. Or put another
way, this was an intelligence-led witch-hunt which was based on the illegal
disclosure of private information.
Flynn had told the US
Vice President Mike Pence that sanctions were not discussed and that the
conversation with the Russian diplomat was only about seasonal pleasantries and
making arrangements about a forthcoming phone call between President Trump and
Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin – that call was finally made on January 28.
Pence stood by Flynn
initially, telling media outlets that there was nothing untoward in the phone
Legally, a private US
citizen – which Flynn was at that stage before Trump became inaugurated on January
10 – is not permitted to talk about government policy with a foreign state in a
presumptive official capacity.
Apparently now, as it
turns out, sanctions were discussed between Flynn and Kislyak, according to FBI
investigators and US officials quoted by the
. Russia has
refused to comment on the nature of the phone calls.
What was Flynn
thinking of? At one stage during the Obama administration, he had served as head
of the Defense Intelligence Agency – one of the 16 US federal spy organizations.
It seems incredible that given his expertise in matters of US state surveillance
practice, Flynn could have been so reckless as to hold phone conversations with
Russia's top diplomat in Washington on national security issues outside of his
considering too that Flynn was shortly about to assume office as a senior national
security advisor to the new president, Donald Trump, who was already under intense
media scrutiny over his alleged links to Russia.
Not only hold phone
conversations, but as seems likely, Flynn broached the subject of how US sanctions
levied by Obama might be lifted under the Trump administration. For Flynn not to
realize that every word would be tapped by US intelligence seems an incredible
lapse of judgment on his part.
The suspect phone
contact occurred at the time Obama sanctioned several Russian diplomats over
allegations that Russian hackers had interfered in the presidential elections.
Those allegations of Russian state-sponsored hacking have never been proven.
The way the
tells it, US intelligence officials were surprised when Russian
President Vladimir Putin did not reciprocate with Obama's sanctions announced on
December 29, instead choosing to respond by wishing Americans a Happy Christmas.
According to the
, US intelligence began searching for a possible explanation for Putin's
unexpected response, and they found their putative answer in Flynn's call to the
Russian ambassador. It is claimed that Flynn indicated to the Russian diplomat
that the new sanctions imposed by the outgoing Obama administration would be duly
reversed by Trump.
It seems more
plausible, however, that the US intelligence agents did not engage in some
retrospective random search for a mole, but rather they had Flynn in their sights
all along, having listened into this phone call with the Russian ambassador.
And as the Washington
Post pointedly noted this week, Trump promptly praised Putin for not taking
retaliatory action to Obama's sanctions.
The inference here is
that Flynn was acting as mediator with the Russians under instruction from Trump.
"The current and
former officials said that although they believed that [Vice President] 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
administration had already caused deep consternation among the Washington
establishment of State Department, foreign policy think-tanks,
intelligence-military apparatus and aligned corporate news media. Trump's avowed
intentions of normalizing relations with Russia before and after his election on
November 8 have collided with Washington's long-term geo-strategic agenda of
fomenting hostility with Moscow.
resignation of Michael Flynn, who was an influential advocate in the Trump White
House for normalizing relations with Russia, can be seen as a much-desired blow
against Trump over Russia – inflicted by the US Deep State operatives.
There seems little
doubt that Flynn was set up in a sting operation. The only wonder is that he
seemed to walk right into the trap.
It seems very likely
that having procured Flynn's scalp, the political enemies of Trump will not stop
there. The big prize is Trump himself and his ousting from the presidency through
impeachment on charges of conspiring with an enemy state.
All the hoopla over
Flynn in the US media is just the beginning of a campaign to finger Trump as the
person who gave him clearance to illicitly contact the Russians.
A soft coup against
Trump by the US Deep State has been speculated for some time now, especially over
his "friendly" Russia policy being at odds with the powers-that-be who are
hellbent on hostility towards Moscow. And it seems that incompetence within the
Trump administration is playing straight into that agenda to oust him from the
'Talking with Trump national security adviser Michael
Flynn was one of many ways Moscow tried to get inside
information about America's financial war against the
by Katie Zavadski...02.17.17
"The last major Russian spy arrested on U.S. soil was
busted for seeking the kind of information retired Lt. Gen.
Michael Flynn has been accused of dishing out.
During a White House press conference on Thursday,
President Donald Trump defended Flynn, his former national
security adviser, for talking about U.S. sanctions against
Moscow with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak while Barack
Obama was still in office. It's an act that may have put
Flynn in legal jeopardy; The Washington Post reported
Thursday that Flynn denied to the FBI having such
conversations, despite evidence that he did.
Recently filed court documents show just how important
information about sanctions was to Russian intelligence.
Those documents involve a two-year-old case against Evgeny
Buryakov, a Russian bank employee who admitted to being an
unregistered agent of Russian intelligence in the U.S.
Buryakov pleaded out and the case never went to trial. But
case filings show that the SVR, Russia's foreign intelligence
service, was keenly interested in the U.S. government's
attempts to use financial sanctions to retaliate against
Russian military aggression.
His handlers asked Buryakov to look for information on the
"effects of economic sanctions on our country," according to
court documents, and he complied. The FBI sent an undercover
operative to keep him interested.
In August 2014, an undercover agent showed Buryakov a
document from the Treasury Department marked "Internal
Treasury Use Only," that "contained information regarding
Russian individuals subject to sanctions," according to court
filings. (It's not clear whether the papers in question were
actual internal Treasury Department memos.) Buryakov told the
undercover that he wanted more information.
A few weeks later, the undercover agent and a confidential
source fed him another document, telling him that "the
Treasury Department was using the document in connection with
its deliberations regarding additional sanctions," which
Buryakov promptly fed to his handlers at Russia's foreign
That is exactly the kind of information that would be
useful to foreign spies, said Zachary Goldman, a former
Treasury and Department of Defense official who's now the
executive director of the Center on Law and Security at New
The U.S. authorized sanctions against Russia relating to
its annexation of Crimea in March of 2014 and began a
crackdown against individuals and a Russian bank. In the
period Buryakov was fishing, then, his overseers would have
wanted to know which entities or people would be sanctioned
"In that period, the first half of 2014, the Russian
government was very interested in figuring out what we were
going to do," Goldman said.
When Flynn spoke to Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, in
December 2016, the Russians would've been in much the same
The sanctions announced by the Obama administration that
month exercised a relatively new authority enacted by the
president in April 2015. Obama's order on cyberattacks was
originally in response to Chinese attacks on the private
sector, and later broadened to be applicable to the Russian
attempts to interfere in U.S. elections.
Finding out who was going to be targeted, and what the
policy would be like under the next administration, would
have been a top priority for all actors of Russian
intelligence. They come in various categories: Some, like
Buryakov, conduct espionage in secret while pretending to be
an ordinary employee of a foreign company, while others
construct alternate identities and lay in wait for years. The
third category come here under diplomatic cover, having, in
effect, a dual role as diplomats and spies.
"It seems that the reports are that there was some kind of
suggestion that Flynn gave Kislyak, along the lines of, don't
worry about these sanctions, when we take office, things will
improve significantly," Goldman said. "And undoubtedly,
that's something they would want know."
The point of sanctions is to change another country's
behavior, Goldman added.
"If you were the Russians, you would want to know what the
trigger for new sanctions would be, and what the catalyst for
the removal of sanctions would be," he said. "Whether that's
what Flynn discussed with Kislyak, I have no idea."
Details about the conversations, and whom Flynn misled
about their content, are still emerging. But we know that
when the Obama administration exiled 35 diplomats and shut
down a Russian compound on Long Island, Russian officials
announced they would not be following suit.
At a press conference on Thursday, however, Trump backed
Flynn's right to discuss that matter.
"Very simple. Mike [Flynn] was doing his job," Trump said.
"He was calling countries and his counterparts. So, it
certainly would have been OK with me if he did it.
... ... ...
If so, you are in good company... Don't forget to buy M16,
ammunition and tickets to Syria. We probably will be able to
survive without your posts for some time.
Sunday, February 19, 2017 at 02:58 PM
ilsm said in reply to im1dc...
im1dc, read your 4th amendment, and say wht the FBI etc did
to republicans is okay!
Not only democrats rigged Primary to elect Clinton as
presidential candidate last year even though she has poor
judgement (violating government cyber security policy) and is
incompetent (her email server was not secured) when she was the
Secretary of State, and was revealed to be corrupt by Bernie
Sanders during the Primary, but also democrats encourage illegal
immigration, discourage work, and "conned" young voters with
free college/food/housing/health care/Obama phone. Democrat
government employees/politicians also committed crimes leaking
classified information which caused former National Security
Adviser Michael Flynn losing his job.
However middle/working class used their common senses voting
against Clinton last November. Although I have not been a
republican and didn't vote in primary but I voted for Trump and
those Republicans who supported Trump in last November since I
am not impressed with the "integrity" and "judgement" of
democrats, Anti-Trump protesters, Anti-Trump republicans (such
as McCain who is too old to make a sound judgement), and those
media who donated/endorsed Clinton during presidential election
and they'll work for globalist, the super rich, who moved
jobs/investment overseas for cheap labor/tax and demanded
middle/working class to pay tax to support welfare of illegal
aliens and refugees who will be globalist's illegal voters and
Star Trek...the Borg...Not a huge fan of star trek but the show does reveal
interesting things...the borg, resistance is futile, etc, but it seems as tho
resistance wws not futile, according the the show...the matrix is a good movie
too...too many more to mention. I herd an interview with Robert Steele, very
interesting...any thoughts? I also came across a christian leaning website
who supports Trump, and they are quite smart..trunews.com......not your average
piece of shit evangelist...anyway, thats all I got today...
the thing you are missing is that the evil zio loves chaos... and Mericans are
falling for it... how else will Soros make money without extreme movements....
when there is chaos they buy shit cheap.... Soros is reading these articles and
the more chaos the better for them... when will you learn...
TrumpO the AssClown
is an idiot on his last legs in life. The
stress he has made for himself will only get worse until he is hospitalized
from stress that he is unable to handle. He is looking at a heart attack & CHD
due to being overweight. And judging by his face, and blood pressure problems,
he is in a very stressful situation that he never expected.
I think Trump gets it... the "trump" card is the minimal ties by him to special
interests... notice I said minimal... that said, he's not as beholden as others
before him... take the Boeing deal to provide a new AF1... he bluntly says it's
overpriced, so Boeing reduces price... there is no president being owned by big
biz in this scenario... and the new media fight is being likened to the media
fight of Nixon... Idon't see itt that way... with the advent of numerous
alternative news outlets (where I get mine), it's not the same CBS and Walter
Cronkite or NBC and David Brinkley 6PM news show where most folks were almost
programmed to get any news each day, so it could be tailored to fit a
propaganda lean... the east European and Mideast wars are going to take the
longest to root out the villians, as the MIC will do anything/everything to not
lose one tiny fraction of their power, calling the shots with folks like McCain
and Graham... it's going to take at least a year, possibly two, but I agree
with the author in that if Trump shows his base he's working hard trying to get
the things implemented that he stands for, the Demos are Dead, I tell you, DEAD
the more the swamp is drained... the more Soros laughs... more chaos... more
protests, more anarchy, then killings come, total fucking chaos is the goal...
then the zios can come in and buy it for a song...
fall of USSR made how many
Order out of chaos..... the more chaos - the more hand wringing....they are
excited to get closer to their goal..
Soros would love to be injected with something to make him younger so he can
live to see the collapse of USA, and then come in and snap up all the assets...
it would be better than when snapped up property in hungary for a song...
of course Soros and the lot wanted Hillary to win, so she could further erode
USA, but really they must be pleased with Trump as President, as it appears
they could not have dreamed how much choas a Trump Presidency can bring...
so things are turning out nicely for the zios... maybe even ahead of
schedule with Trump...
now all they have to do is provoke Trump into doing things to stir things
up... should be easy to provoke Trump as he is easily rattled
How can you possibly understand zios such as Soros if you don't think like
I agree. Trump has enemies in the opposition
party that's trying to create a coup d'etat
atmosphere to bring him down. It's blatantly
obvious with the collusion between the news media
and capitol hill members. This is going way
beyond standard politics and Trump needs to treat
them accordingly. I'm not big on conspiracies but
this one slaps you in the face with the evidence.
What Trump did was uncover the deep State by using Flynn as a soldier to ferret-out the deep dark
places....what you are seeing is the enemy being uncovered. Trump made this happen and now you will
see who is in charge....the deep State has now been exposed. We will now see the eradication of this
foul 5th column.
"... The Washington Post is complicit in a treasonous betrayal of trust by unelected, arrogant and truly dangerous intelligence agents. It is long past due to have a TOTAL house cleaning of these agencies with dire penalties imposed on such malevolent enemies of democracy. If that then includes the Post itself, let the Post clean up its act. ..."
"... The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States. ..."
"... This Russian nonsense is not going to fly. Why should anyone believe a word of this story? So what if Flynn discussed sanctions anyway! Who are these traitors in the State Department, and why are they still on the payroll? The majority of the public is not going to buy this nonsense , you are still in denial that you lost the election. ..."
"... This reminds me of Obama getting caught on a hot mic telling the Russian president, "I'll have more flexibility after the election." Signaling that the hardline against Russia would soften if he won reelection. (Clearly a national security issue.) ..."
"... But of course, it's only when the perpetually-outraged left don't like somebody holding different views than them that it becomes a 'dire constitutional crisis.' ..."
"... This is just another Left wing hit job with no real substance, that elevates innuendo and a passing brushed off question to the level of "negotiation". The article uses the requisite obscure language of "officials" who in turn offer little up. This is politics pure and simple. ..."
Note how skillfully NYT presstitutes present Russians as the next incarnation of Satan, contact
with which is prohibited for Christians.
Who are those nine officials... Looks like Jeff Bezos is just a puppet. Taking on Flynn is a
serious game which is far above his head. I do not remember any fuss over Bill
Clinton getting Russian money (really outrageous honorarium for the speech) which if you think about
it is even more clear violation of Logan act.
Didn't Obama do a similar thing before running for election?
From the start, Michael Flynn, a retired army lieutenant general, was a disturbing choice as
President Trump's national security adviser. He is a hothead with extremist views in a critical
job that is supposed to build consensus through thoughtful, prudent decision-making. The choice
is now growing more unnerving every day.
A conspiracy theorist who has stoked dangerous fears about Islam, Mr. Flynn was fired by the
Obama administration as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and led anti-Hillary Clinton
chants of "lock her up" at the 2016 Republican Convention. He raised eyebrows by cultivating a
mystifyingly cozy relationship with Russia, which the Pentagon considers a major threat.
Now we have learned that in the weeks before the inauguration, Mr. Flynn discussed American
sanctions on Russia, and areas of possible cooperation, with Moscow's ambassador to Washington,
Sergey Kislyak. They spoke a day before President Obama imposed sanctions on Russia for hacking
the Democrats' computers, probably in an effort to sway the election in Mr. Trump's favor.
Mr. Flynn's underhanded, possibly illegal message was that the Obama administration was Russia's
adversary, and that would change under Mr. Trump and that any sanctions could be undone. The
result seems to be that Russia decided not to retaliate with its own sanctions.
We know this not from Mr. Flynn or the administration, but from accounts first provided to
The Washington Post
(aka CIA Pravda)
by nine current and former government
officials who had access to reports from American intelligence and law enforcement agencies that
routinely monitor the communications of Russian diplomats. Bizarrely, Mr. Trump told reporters on
Friday afternoon that he was unaware of the Post report, but would "look into that."
6:01 AM EST
The Washington Post is complicit in a treasonous betrayal of trust by unelected,
arrogant and truly dangerous intelligence agents. It is long past due to have a TOTAL house
cleaning of these agencies with dire penalties imposed on such malevolent enemies of
democracy. If that then includes the Post itself, let the Post clean up its act.
2/14/2017 8:02 PM EST
Who leaked classified telephone intercepts of a foreign diplomat to the Post? Why isn't
that person in jail?
2/14/2017 1:34 PM EST
Flynn would not dare to go ahead with telling Russia not having to worry about sanctions
and that the future would be better with Trump without Trump direction.
So Flynn's resignation is just an appeasement. The real story is Trump relationship with
8:12 AM EST
As though Flynn is just an idiot who would have never suspected the NSA was listening in on
his phone call to ... a Russian Ambassador. Yeah right.
2/14/2017 12:29 AM EST
People make reference to the Logan Act and brushing it off as nothing that will be used
against Flynn. But the law is on the books, regardless. So I gather now we pick and chose
which laws to apply and which not to apply? Am I a bit confused? It was placed as a law for a
good reason, just because no one has ever been prosecuted under this law do we dismiss it as
"old" and pretend it is not there?
The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United
States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who
negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.
intended to prevent the undermining of the government's position.
The Act was passed following George Logan's unauthorized negotiations with France in
1798, and was signed into law by President John Adams on January 30, 1799. The Act was last
amended in 1994, and violation of the Logan Act is a felony.
To date, only one person has ever been indicted for violating the act's provisions.
However, no person has ever been prosecuted for alleged violations of the act.
2/13/2017 3:00 PM EST
Yet ANOTHER fake news story based on "anonymous sources". The media is now nothing
more than a means for distributing rumors, dressed up to look like "news" by labeling the
rumor mongers as "anonymous sources".
, 2/13/2017 2:27 PM EST
This Russian nonsense is not going to fly. Why should anyone believe a word of this
story? So what if Flynn discussed sanctions anyway! Who are these traitors in the State
Department, and why are they still on the payroll? The majority of the public is not going to
buy this nonsense , you are still in denial that you lost the election.
2/13/2017 5:45 PM EST
Looks like a preemptive set up so that Obama's historic legacy-building tough-guy
sanctions, in response to imaginary "election hacking", will not be touched. If anyone dares
question Obama's historic legacy-building tough-guy sanctions, in response to imaginary
"election hacking", then they must be "in cahoots" with those darn Russians who "hacked the
Meanwhile, President Trump continues to do good work for all Americans.
2/13/2017 1:30 PM EST
Americans want to know if kickbacks are/were being offered (by Russians) to Flynn and other
Trump-team members in positions to push for rollback of trade sanctions against Russia.
2/13/2017 1:34 PM EST
"Americans want to know"... you mean like Bill C's "speaking fees" or "donations"
(cough-cough) to the family foundation? LOL!
Funny how the words of anonymous Obama administration "current and former U.S. officials",
apparently fellow Hillary supporters, are treated as unbiased, indisputable and fact.
Laugh out loud at this, it is revealing: "Those officials were already alarmed by what they
saw as a Russian assault on the U.S. election." Just so so you know what planet they are
coming from. Hillary lost. You can't blame it on Russia. Get over it.
In addition to not questioning the words of anonymous Obama administration "current and former
U.S. officials" there appears to be obvious discrimination and bias against the Trump
, 2/13/2017 3:02 AM EST
This is going to turn out to be another nothing-burger. All Trump has to do is wait it out
for any proof to come up, and if it is just unsubstantiated rumors, then to just write it off
as more fake news by frothy Dems ... Regarding Russian "hacking" the election, all Trump has
to do is get Brennan and Clapper on the hot seat, and have them talk for hours and hours about
John Podesta's Gmail password. Then ask "What else?" only to find that Big Ed at RT TV is a
Russian spy!! And so is Tucker Carlson. And probably Mel Gibson too, leading to the conclusion
that the Dems are a bunch of loons. Then ask "Who taught you this?" only to find out that
Obama ordered an in-depth sabotage of the incoming administration
2/12/2017 9:33 PM EST
Didn't Obama do a similar thing before running for election?
, 2/12/2017 3:22 PM EST
Typical Washington Post, running a story without confirmed sources to back up the story.
Just speculation as usual.
2/12/2017 11:42 AM EST
Russia hacked the DNC with Iraq's WMDs...
2/11/2017 3:20 PM EST
This reminds me of Obama getting caught on a hot mic telling the Russian president,
"I'll have more flexibility after the election." Signaling that the hardline against Russia
would soften if he won reelection. (Clearly a national security issue.)
But of course, it's only when the perpetually-outraged left don't like somebody holding
different views than them that it becomes a 'dire constitutional crisis.'
2/11/2017 11:17 AM EST
Approach the logic of the accusation in reverse, any Russian official meeting an American
official will be pressed to finding an opening to discuss sanctions. Any American official
knows a Russian diplomat will bring sanctions up and have a deflection to handle it. This
doesn't represent a "discussion" on a diplomatic level.
This is just another Left wing hit job with no real substance, that elevates innuendo and
a passing brushed off question to the level of "negotiation". The article uses the requisite
obscure language of "officials" who in turn offer little up. This is politics pure and simple.
KingMax, 2/11/2017 11:34 AM EST
He spoke with Kislyak the same day the sanctions were announced and then lied about what
was discussed (oh, right, suddenly "couldn't remember" because, you know, it was over a month
ago). But good job rationalizing his deceit.
JungleTrunks, 2/11/2017 11:50 AM EST
And yours is the typical cry of left wing malcontents that create as much controversy as
you can from what signifies nothing. No reporter ha disclosed what actually was said. It's a
virtual certainty that expected overtures were made, and typical brush off language was
reciprocated. You know nothing but innuendo backed by a desire of extreme prejudice to
prosecute any opportunity to defame anyone in the administration, this much is certain, the
only certainty frankly.
Federal officials who have read the transcript of the call were surprised by Mr. Flynn's
comments, since he would have known that American eavesdroppers closely monitor such calls. They
were even more surprised that Mr. Trump's team publicly denied that the topics of conversation
The call is the latest example of how Mr. Trump's advisers have come under scrutiny from American
counterintelligence officials. The F.B.I. is also investigating Mr. Trump's former campaign
chairman, Paul Manafort; Carter Page, a businessman and former foreign policy adviser to the
campaign; and Roger Stone, a longtime Republican operative.
Prosecutions in these types of cases are rare, and the law is murky, particularly around people
involved in presidential transitions. The officials who had read the transcripts acknowledged
that while the conversation warranted investigation, it was unlikely, by itself, to lead to
charges against a sitting national security adviser.
But, at the very least, openly engaging in policy discussions with a foreign government during a
presidential transition is a remarkable breach of protocol. The norm has been for the
president-elect's team to respect the sitting president, and to limit discussions with foreign
governments to pleasantries. Any policy discussions, even with allies, would ordinarily be kept
as vague as possible.
"It's largely shunned, period. But one cannot rule it out with an ally like the U.K.," said Derek
Chollet, who was part of the Obama transition in 2008 and then served in senior roles at the
State Department, White House and Pentagon.
"But it's way out of bounds when the said country is an adversary, and one that has been
judged to have meddled in the election," he added. "It's just hard to imagine anyone having a
substantive discussion with an adversary, particularly if it's about trying to be reassuring."
Adam Goldman and Michael S. Schmidt contributed reporting.
The globalist mafia is trying to destroy Trump. There might be the same part of intelligence
community which is still loyal to Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Still Flynn discussing sanctions, which could have been a violation of an 18th century
law, the Logan Act, that bars unauthorized citizens from brokering deals with foreign governments
involved in disputes with the United States.
Keith Kellogg links with Oracle my be as asset to Trump team.
As far back as the passage of the Patriot Act after 9/11, civil libertarians worried about
the surveillance state, the Panopticon, the erosion of privacy rights and due process in the name
of national security.
Paranoid fantasies were floated that President George W. Bush was monitoring the library cards
of political dissidents. Civil libertarians hailed NSA contractor Edward Snowden as a hero, or at
least accepted him as a necessary evil, for exposing the extent of Internet surveillance under President
Will civil libertarians now speak up for former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, whose
career has been destroyed with a barrage of leaked wiretaps? Does anyone care if those leaks were
accurate or legal?
Over the weekend, a few honest observers of the Flynn imbroglio
noted that none of the strategically leaked intercepts of his conversations with Russian Ambassador
Sergey Kislyak proved he actually did anything wrong .
The media fielded accusations that Flynn discussed lifting the Obama administration's sanctions
on Russia – a transgression that would have been a serious violation of pre-inauguration protocol
at best, and a prosecutable offense at worst. Flynn ostensibly sealed his fate by falsely assuring
Vice President Mike Pence he had no such discussions with Kislyak, prompting Pence to issue a robust
defense of Flynn that severely embarrassed Pence in retrospect.
On Tuesday, Eli Lake of
Bloomberg News joined the chorus of skeptics who said the hive of anonymous leakers infesting
the Trump administration never leaked anything that proved Flynn lied to Pence:
He says in his resignation letter that he did not deliberately leave out elements of his conversations
with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak when he recounted them to Vice President Mike Pence. The New York
Times and Washington Post reported that the transcript of the phone call reviewed over the weekend
by the White House could be read different ways. One White House official with knowledge of the
conversations told me that the Russian ambassador raised the sanctions to Flynn and that Flynn
responded that the Trump team would be taking office in a few weeks and would review Russia policy
and sanctions . That's neither illegal nor improper.
Lake also noted that leaks of sensitive national security information, such as the transcripts
of Flynn's phone calls to Kislyak, are extremely rare. In their rush to collect a scalp from
the Trump administration, the media forgot to tell its readers how unusual and alarming the Flynn-quisition
It's very rare that reporters are ever told about government-monitored communications of U.S.
citizens, let alone senior U.S. officials. The last story like this to hit Washington was in 2009
when Jeff Stein, then of CQ, reported on intercepted phone calls between a senior Aipac lobbyist
and Jane Harman, who at the time was a Democratic member of Congress.
Normally intercepts of U.S. officials and citizens are some of the most tightly held government
secrets. This is for good reason. Selectively disclosing details of private conversations monitored
by the FBI or NSA gives the permanent state the power to destroy reputations from the cloak of
anonymity. This is what police states do.
In the past it was considered scandalous for senior U.S. officials to even request the identities
of U.S. officials incidentally monitored by the government (normally they are redacted from intelligence
reports). John Bolton's nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations was derailed in
2006 after the NSA confirmed he had made 10 such requests when he was Undersecretary of State
for Arms Control in George W. Bush's first term. The fact that the intercepts of Flynn's conversations
with Kislyak appear to have been widely distributed inside the government is a red flag.
While President Trump contemplated Flynn's fate on Monday evening, the
Wall Street Journal suggested: "How about asking if the spooks listening to Mr. Flynn
obeyed the law?" Among the questions the WSJ posed was whether intelligence agents secured proper
FISA court orders for the surveillance of Flynn.
That s the sort of question that convulsed the entire political spectrum, from liberals to libertarians,
after the Snowden revelations. Not long ago, both Democrats and Republicans were deeply concerned
about accountability and procedural integrity for the sprawling surveillance apparatus developed
by our law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Those are among the most serious concerns of the
Information Age, and they should not be cast aside in a mad dash to draw some partisan blood.
There are several theories as to exactly who brought Flynn down and why. Was it an internal White
House power struggle, the work of Obama administration holdovers, or the alligators of the "Deep
State" lunging to take a bite from the president who promised to "drain the swamp?"
Washington Free Beacon has sources who say Flynn's resignation is "the culmination of
a secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald
Trump's national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran."
Flynn has prominently opposed that deal. According to the Free Beacon, this "small task
force of Obama loyalists" are ready to waylay anyone in the Trump administration who threatens the
Iran deal, their efforts coordinated by the sleazy Obama adviser who boasted of his ability to manipulate
the press by feeding them lies, Ben Rhodes.
Some observers are chucking at the folly of Michael Flynn daring to take on the intelligence community,
and paying the price for his reckless impudence. That is not funny – it is terrifying. In
fact, it is the nightmare of the rogue NSA come to life, the horror story that kept privacy advocates
tossing in their sheets for years.
Michael Flynn was appointed by the duly elected President of the United States. He certainly should
not have been insulated from criticism, but if he was brought down by entrenched, unelected agency
officials, it is nearly a coup – especially if, as Eli Lake worried on Twitter, Flynn's resignation
inspires further attacks with even higher-ranking targets:
Among the many things hideously wrong with this sentiment is that the American people know absolutely
nothing about the leakers who brought Flynn down, and might be lining up their next White House targets
at this very moment. We have no way to evaluate their motives or credibility. We didn't vote for
them, and we will have no opportunity to vote them out of office if we dissent from their agenda.
As mentioned above, we do not know if the material they are leaking is accurate .
Byron York of the Washington Examiner addressed the latter point by calling for full disclosure:
Important that entire transcript of Flynn-Kislyak conversation be released. Leakers have already
cherrypicked. Public needs to see it all.
That is no less important with Flynn's resignation in hand. We still need to know the full story
of his downfall. The American people deserve to know who is assaulting the government they voted
for in 2016. They deserve protection from the next attempt to manipulate our government with cherry
They also deserve some intellectual consistency from those who have long and loudly worried about
the emergence of a surveillance state, and from conservatives who claim to value the rule of law.
Unknown persons with a mysterious agenda just made strategic use of partial information from a surveillance
program of uncertain legality to take out a presidential adviser.
Whether it's an Obama shadow government staging a Beltway insurrection, or Deep State officials
protecting their turf, this is the nightmare scenario of the post-Snowden era or are we not having
that nightmare anymore, if we take partisan pleasure in the outcome?
"... "It's Over Folks" The Neocons & The "Deep State" Have Neutered The Trump Presidency ..."
"... For one thing, Flynn dared the unthinkable: he dared to declare that the bloated US intelligence community had to be reformed. Flynn also tried to subordinate the CIA and the Joint Chiefs to the President via the National Security Council. ..."
"... Put differently, Flynn tried to wrestle the ultimate power and authority from the CIA and the Pentagon and subordinate them back to the White House. ..."
"... Ever since Trump made it to the White House, he has taken blow after blow from the Neocon-run Ziomedia, from Congress, from all the Hollywood doubleplusgoodthinking "stars" and even from European politicians. And Trump took each blow without ever fighting back. Nowhere was his famous "you are fired!" to be seen. But I still had hope. I wanted to hope. I felt that it was my duty to hope. ..."
"... It's over, folks, the deep state has won. From now on, Trump will become the proverbial shabbos-goy , the errand boy of the Israel lobby. Hassan Nasrallah was right when he called him 'an idiot '. ..."
"... The Chinese and Iranian will openly laugh. The Russians won't – they will be polite, they will smile, and try to see if some common sense policies can still be salvaged from this disaster. Some might. But any dream of a partnership between Russia and the United States has died tonight. ..."
"... Trump, for all his faults, did favor the US, as a country, over the global Empire. Trump was also acutely aware that 'more of the same' was not an option. He wanted policies commensurate with the actual capabilities of the USA. With Flynn gone and the Neocons back in full control – this is over. Now we are going to be right back to ideology over reality. ..."
"... I am quite sure that nobody today is celebrating in the Kremlin. Putin, Lavrov and the others surely understand exactly what happened. It is as if Khodorkovsy would have succeeded in breaking Putin in 2003. In fact, I have to credit Russian analysts who for several weeks already have been comparing Trump to Yanukovich, who also was elected by a majority of the people and who failed to show the resolve needed to stop the 'color revolution' started against him. But if Trump is the new Yanukovich, will the US become the next Ukraine? ..."
"... Flynn was very much the cornerstone of the hoped-for Trump foreign policy. There was a real chance that he would reign in the huge, bloated and all-powerful three letter agencies and that he would focus US power against the real enemy of the West: the Wahabis. With Flynn gone, this entire conceptual edifice has now come down. We are going to be left with the likes of Mattis and his anti-Iranian statements. Clowns who only impress other clowns. ..."
Now let's immediately get one thing out of the way: Flynn was hardly a saint or a perfect wise
man who would single handedly saved the world. That he was not.
However, what Flynn was is the cornerstone
of Trump's national security policy . For one thing, Flynn dared the unthinkable: he dared to declare
that the bloated US intelligence community had to be reformed. Flynn also tried to subordinate the
CIA and the Joint Chiefs to the President via the National Security Council.
Put differently, Flynn
tried to wrestle the ultimate power and authority from the CIA and the Pentagon and subordinate them
back to the White House. Flynn also wanted to work with Russia. Not because he was a Russia lover,
the notion of a Director of the DIA as a Putin-fan is ridiculous, but Flynn was rational, he understood
that Russia was no threat to the USA or to Europe and that Russia had the West had common interests.
That is another absolutely unforgivable crimethink in Washington DC.
The Neocon run 'deep state' has now forced Flynn to resign under the idiotic pretext that he had
a telephone conversation, on an open, insecure and clearly monitored, line with the Russian ambassador.
And Trump accepted this resignation.
Ever since Trump made it to the White House, he has taken blow after blow from the Neocon-run
Ziomedia, from Congress, from all the Hollywood doubleplusgoodthinking "stars" and even from European
politicians. And Trump took each blow without ever fighting back. Nowhere was his famous "you are
fired!" to be seen. But I still had hope. I wanted to hope. I felt that it was my duty to hope.
But now Trump has betrayed us all.
Remember how Obama showed his true face when he
hypocritically denounced his friend and pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. ? Today, Trump has shown
us his true face. Instead of refusing Flynn's resignation and instead of firing those who dared cook
up these ridiculous accusations against Flynn, Trump accepted the resignation. This is not only an
act of abject cowardice, it is also an amazingly stupid and self-defeating betrayal because now Trump
will be alone, completely alone, facing the likes of Mattis and Pence – hard Cold Warrior types,
ideological to the core, folks who want war and simply don't care about reality.
Again, Flynn was not my hero. But he was, by all accounts, Trump's hero. And Trump betrayed him.
The consequences of this will be immense. For one thing, Trump is now clearly broken. It took
the 'deep state' only weeks to castrate Trump and to make him bow to the powers that be . Those who
would have stood behind Trump will now feel that he will not stand behind them and they will all
move back away from him. The Neocons will feel elated by the elimination of their worst enemy and
emboldened by this victory they will push on, doubling-down over and over and over again.
It's over, folks, the deep state has won. From now on, Trump will become the proverbial shabbos-goy , the errand boy of the Israel lobby.
Hassan Nasrallah was right when he
called him 'an
The Chinese and Iranian will openly laugh. The Russians won't – they will be polite, they will
smile, and try to see if some common sense policies can still be salvaged from this disaster. Some
might. But any dream of a partnership between Russia and the United States has died tonight.
The EU leaders will, of course, celebrate. Trump was nowhere the scary bogeyman they feared. Turns
out that he is a doormat – very good for the EU.
Where does all this leave us – the millions of anonymous 'deplorables' who try as best we can
to resist imperialism, war, violence and injustice?
I think that we were right in our hopes because that is all we had – hopes. No expectations, just
hopes. But now we objectively have very little reasons left to hope. For one thing, the Washington
'swamp' will not be drained. If anything, the swamp has triumphed. We can only find some degree of
solace in two undeniable facts:
Hillary would have been far worse than any version of a Trump Presidency.
In order to defeat Trump, the US deep state has had to terribly weaken the US and the AngloZionist
Empire. Just like Erdogan' purges have left the Turkish military in shambles, the anti-Trump 'color
revolution' has inflicted terrible damage on the reputation, authority and even credibility of
The first one is obvious. So let me clarify the second one. In their hate-filled rage against
Trump and the American people (aka "the basket of deplorables") the Neocons have had to show they
true face. By their rejection of the outcome of the elections, by their riots, their demonization
of Trump, the Neocons have shown two crucial things: first, that the US democracy is a sad joke and
that they, the Neocons, are an occupation regime which rules against the will of the American people.
In other words, just like Israel, the USA has no legitimacy left. And since, just like Israel, the
USA are unable to frighten their enemies, they are basically left with nothing, no legitimacy, no
ability to coerce. So yes, the Neocons have won. But their victory is removes the last chance for
the US to avoid a collapse.
Trump, for all his faults, did favor the US, as a country, over the global Empire. Trump was also
acutely aware that 'more of the same' was not an option. He wanted policies commensurate with the
actual capabilities of the USA. With Flynn gone and the Neocons back in full control – this is over.
Now we are going to be right back to ideology over reality.
Trump probably could have made America, well, maybe not "great again", but at least stronger,
a major world power which could negotiate and use its leverage to get the best deal possible from
the others. That's over now. With Trump broken, Russia and China will go right back to their pre-Trump
stance: a firm resistance backed by a willingness and capability to confront and defeat the USA at
I am quite sure that nobody today is celebrating in the Kremlin. Putin, Lavrov and the others
surely understand exactly what happened. It is as if Khodorkovsy would have succeeded in breaking
Putin in 2003. In fact, I have to credit Russian analysts who for several weeks already have been
comparing Trump to Yanukovich, who also was elected by a majority of the people and who failed to
show the resolve needed to stop the 'color revolution' started against him. But if Trump is the new
Yanukovich, will the US become the next Ukraine?
Flynn was very much the cornerstone of the hoped-for Trump foreign policy. There was a real chance
that he would reign in the huge, bloated and all-powerful three letter agencies and that he would
focus US power against the real enemy of the West: the Wahabis. With Flynn gone, this entire conceptual
edifice has now come down. We are going to be left with the likes of Mattis and his anti-Iranian
statements. Clowns who only impress other clowns.
Today's Neocon victory is a huge event and it will probably be completely misrepresented by the
official media. Ironically, Trump supporters will also try minimize it all. But the reality is that
barring a most unlikely last-minute miracle, it's over for Trump and the hopes of millions of people
in the USA and the rest of the world who had hoped that the Neocons could be booted out of power
by means of a peaceful election. That is clearly not going to happen.
I see very dark clouds on the horizon.
* * *
UPDATE1 : Just to stress an important point: the disaster is not so much that Flynn is out but
what Trump's caving in to the Neocon tells us about Trump's character (or lack thereof). Ask yourself
– after what happened to Flynn, would you stick your neck out for Trump?
UPDATE2 : Just as predicted – the Neocons are celebrating and, of course, doubling-down:
The entirety of tRump's foreign policy doesn't revolve around Flynn's status.
Has tRump decided to reinstate the TTP and TTIP as "trade" policy goals?
Decided to not renegotiate/pull out of NAFTA and other so-called trade pacts?
Pull back/reconsolidate the Empire of Bases? Attempt to totally disrupt China's
OBOR or Russia's EEU through the use of terrorist proxies as HRC's Neocons
planned? Then there's Flynn's illogical hatred of Iran and the complications
that posed for reestablishing cordial relations with Russia. And those points
are just a few of many.
IMO, Saker and other commentators have reacted in
knee-jerk fashion to Flynn's resignation, for he didn't represent the
be-all/end-all of tRump's foreign policy agenda. I'm far more disturbed by many
of tRump's cabinet choices plus the fact that they were confirmed despite their
lies and criminal actions, which is what's provoked most of the resistance to
the current national government–congress especially.
"... "It is difficult to avoid the impression that Flynn formed his ideas about Iran as a US intelligence officer during the George
W. Bush administration's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In both of those wars Iran and the US pursued parallel but often conflicting
strategies, with both countries seeking the defeat of fundamentalist Sunni Jihadis in Afghanistan and Iraq, but wanting to prevent the
other country from emerging the undisputed victor. The result was what might be called 'duplicitous cooperation', with Iran and the
US simultaneously working with and against each other in an often totally ruthless and treacherous way. ..."
"... Flynn was as much a warmonger as other Neo-Cons, he was just more focused on Iran and friendlier towards Russia. The next goal
in the US grand strategy in the mid-east is Iran though, and as such he was the choice Trump went for when picking him. I think the
Saker is overreacting a bit here, maybe he was hoping for more of a change under D Trump, which I never expected, so this early ouster
to me is not as shocking as to him. ..."
"... To say the firing of Flynn alone was the breaking point for Trump's administration, vastly over-estimates the president's wilingness
or ability to take on the US deep-state. Had he wanted to do so, why pick Pompeo as head of the CIA? Why cosy up to Saudi-Arabia? ..."
"... Anyway, on the grand chess board of things a pawn just tumbled and fell, because the King would not protect him. But it was
just a pawn and the pieces will have to keep on moving. ..."
"... As i said it from the beginning, this so called trump hype was way over exaggerated and this wishful thinking of Trump-Putin
duo saving the world was ridiculous. Putin's Russia is clearly rejecting the very foundation of what is the current USA, the petro $,
so unless Putin was planning to return Russia to it's 90's era Zio-colony, there could never have been a common ground between the two.
"... Besides that there were also other signs like, an ex goldman sachs and soros fund management banker at the head of the secretary
treasury, the constant hammering by the media about trump (as contrary to the complete black out on someone like Dr Ron Paul) ..."
"... At last the truth. I was getting fed up with all the Trump fans. He never did anything to deserve the adulation. Since being
in the whitehouse it has been a mess. He had not shown any foresight or strategic thinking. Whatever cards he had to play he wasted
them l ..."
"... He has employed a whole team of neocons and as for any Russian partnership with the USA this was never ever going to happen
– I don't even know why anyone would think so, There are too many differences. As for Flynn he was extremely anti Iranian how is that
good for Russia ..."
"... Trump, like Nixon, has awoken the "silent majority" and has done us a great service by attacking political correctness. Trump,
like Nixon, had to surround himself with members of the tribe that owns Congress, in order to have a fighting chance of success. Trump,
like Nixon will not succeed, because the minefields were laid before he was sworn in. ..."
"... The fact that outsider Trump has: exposed the internationalists, like Soros, for what they are; shown the "Antifa" hatefest
to be ridiculously shallow; and, exposed the political activism of the courts; will pay long term dividends for those who oppose the
current system. ..."
"... I would not put too much significance to this - Trump was never some kind of knight in shining armor, but just the alternative
to Clinton. He may still do a few good things here and there, but the general thrust of his ideology - and yes he not simply transactional,
because US realism (realpolitik) in itself is an ideology (at the heart of capitalism and empire, in fact). ..."
"... The deciding reason I voted for Trump is still holding - avoiding nuclear war, and it may yet hold for quite a while despite
the neocons, since Clinton is not in the driver's seat. ..."
"... It's a war and when you realize it really is a war, and there is no easy, quick "peace channel" to switch to, you may as well
figure you more than likely won't live through this war, so you're already a dead man or woman walking.. ..."
"... There is not a no-fly-zone in Syria, and we are not composed of radioactive ash. That's quite significant. The president is
not all together but he is not the raging psychopath Clinton is. Let us be thankful for 'small blessings'. I don't recall anyone promising
a rose garden. ..."
"... For those of us with a HCIS (High Cynical Index Syndrome) Trump and his circus clowns were simply a lesser flop than Clinton
and her criminal gang. ..."
"... Flynn was already compromised by the very neocon elements of which you write: Michael Ledeen. ..."
"... And I would add, the counter argument to your neutered Trump, although I agree reasonable, is the clear signal that "You're
fired!" applies to all and everyone. I doubt Pence is 100% bullet proof, nor beyond sacrifice if needs be. ..."
"... Nasrallah has it right. Trump is a limited character, a one term President at best. Most of us will be only too glad to be
fooled again when Ms. Gabbard makes it to position 1 or 2 on the next Democratic Presidential ticket. ..."
"... Trump is the periphery displacing the centre in a Corporate dictatorship, it is the same when the Grand Council of Fascism
ousted Mussolini and arrested him, as Trump did to Hillary Clinton's turn, but the real power exerts itself to reverse the decision.
"... Trouble is when giants fight little people get squashed. The empire has been squashing people by the millions for half a century
(and before that). So I have indifference as to who gets hurt, I just want it to stop. If the US people are the last victims, then so
be it. ..."
"... But we keep calm because we are sure that if amateur analysts could see through the fog of deception, the Russians saw it long
before. Be sure that all counter-measures are in place. ..."
"... Can we get some name recognition for the Russians who were comparing Trump to Yanukovich from the start? Who were they? ..."
"... You mean Trump is "White People's Obama" ? ..."
"... It is naive from the get go to think that Trump will undo the Neocons' agenda that started since 911! Trump from the beginning
should have made sure the backings of the majority of the American people including the immigrants, remain neutral on Muslim issues,
Russia, any policies that the fake liberals would have reason to antagonize him with, in order to minimize protests against him, like
the fake Obama and Clintons. Once elected, he could then implement his policies. His administration and presidency campaign may have
been sabotaged from the get go so that they have reason to blame him with afterwards. ..."
"... Flynn's departure is probably a sign of things to come: more neo-conservativism, more empire building, and more neoliberalism:
back to the Washington Consensus – which never really disappeared. ..."
"... I essentially agree with the premise that the conflict between the Establishment and Trump is basically over Trump being elected
as someone who didn't rise through, and was not acculturated in a conventional Establishment political milieu. I further agree that
Flynn's resignation represents an important Establishment victory. However, the notion that Donald Trump represented the last chance
to avert a major US meltdown, that he aspired to significantly change the path our capitalist system is pursuing, is quite frankly,
hyperbole. You endow Donald Trump with undeserved importance. ..."
"... Donald Trump does not represent now, nor did he ever, a challenge to the prevailing neo-liberal system. Even if he had parried
Establishment's previous challenges, or goes to ultimately push back successfully against existing and future challenges to his policies,
there will not be a historical, significant change to ruling class domestic policies. Any alteration in US foreign policies, would be
selective, and would not persist in the long term. Donald Trump, for all his idiosyncrasies, is very much a ruling class individual,
possessing ruling class ideology. ..."
"... Folks, think about it, Trump's campaign had a hole in it from the beginning; the contradiction of Russia Vs Israel. The relationship
between those two nations is paradox: Russia contradicts what Israel wants in the ME. Trump can't be pro Russia and pro Israel at the
same time. ..."
"... The trump regime really should be called the pence regime, since it is obvious now that pence manages it and trump is mostly
the "showman" mouth and face. ..."
"... The conversation of flynn and the Russian ambassador being the cause seems to me to be a phony reason. I speculate the real
reason is something else. It could be about Russian relations, in which case, maybe flynn was actually more open to warming these, and
pence/trump were not (trump having lied). They had a disagreement and flynn left. ..."
"... It is also possible the israelis ordered flynn's resignation for reasons unknown by me. They've done this before, and this
whole scenario has a strong deja vu feel. Remember Andrew Young? They got him fired in almost the exact same manner, hyping a conversation
he had with a Palestinian in their zio-gay media and forcing carter to fire him. Only in Young's case, mossad spied on him and leaked
info about Young's meeting with Palestinians to the zio-gay media. ..."
"... It's just a dispute between 2 factions of the Zionist empire with Trump representing the more cautious faction. ..."
"... I think Flynn was a Trojan horse planted by the neocons himself. His history shows a career full of anti-Iran sentiment and
an excessive push for a harsher approach toward that country, I can't seem to see why his removal is necessarily a bad thing ..."
"... What I don't understand is this. We see and read of the power exerted by the liberal/neocon "deep state" and their abilities
to disrupt and damage Trump's presidency. But in order to get where he has gotten to today, Trump must have some powerful backers too.
So where are these powerful Trump supporters and what are they doing if anything? ..."
I don't hold out much hope that enough people in this country will wake up under any circumstances. Essay by Caitlin Johnson (Feb
5) on the enjoyment of "liberals" participating in "fear porn" is interesting in this regard.
Yes well, these aren't people of course but sheeple. They do not count anyway, otherwise they wouldn't watch JM$M, nor even worry
about their totally obvious pack of lies (Caitlin Johnson).
II completely agree with Saker's point 2, which is all there is to it, anyway. I don't see what is the big deal about this
Flynn. He's just a Nazi 'educated' general, not unlike all the rest of them (otherwise they wouldn't be generals). I only once
saw him on RT's SophieCo and I didn't like him at all. It (the interview) was a meaningless catastrophe actually.
As long as Trump isn't assassinated (or poisoned/disabled) things are going just fine. The Roth-child mob is certainly trying
to do that. It's been these posonous rats' trademark for centuries. Givi was one of their latest victims.
Another round of suffering is in the near term and beyond which is a continuation of the trajectory the US has been on since the
end of the Cold War. With the start of the previous three US administrations there was always hope for better but it always ended
Why should we not expect more millions to suffer and more death and destruction? The US neocon/neolib ruled Deep State with
Wall St and its intelligence agency jackals at it core want more and will kill and destroy to get it and will continue until they
run up against a brick wall. It is up to the powers in the East, with Russia and China at its core, to stop the US and its Anglosphere
and EU vassals.
All my hopes for the future depend on the Eastern powers standing up to the US. There is nothing in the West to give me any
hope that it can correct itself.
While the US neocon Deep State as revealed itself to intelligent observers (like Saker and his readers), the US general public
is still as clueless as ever, caught in the MSM web of Bernays-ian duopoly identity politics. No, Pence is looking to be the new
Dick Cheney, the power behind the buffoon. That way the US public will not see his hand manipulating the Trump-puppet.
"Former US National Security Advisor Michael Flynn has made a decision to step down as a result of a destabilization campaign
by the media, intelligence community and the Democratic party, WikiLeaks said on Tuesday .."
It seems that VP Pence, in league with the deep-state was the driving force behind the Flynn resignation. Trump made a fatal error
in picking a Russophobe neo-con for his Vice President. It will most likely end destroying him. If you are going to have a "second
in command" who isn't totally loyal to you. At least you pick one you can control. He made the mistake of not doing that. And
unlike others in the regime. Even if Trump wanted to, he can't fire his Vice President. He was elected to office,at the same time
as Trump. So he's stuck with him.
Trump did not select Pence anymore than Reagan selected Bush, who later tried to kill him very early in his Presidency. Pence
was appointed as an overseer and guarantor of the Necon Deep State interests. If Trump does not play ball he will be eliminated
quicker than you can say JFK. The calls for his assasination in MSM, couched as 'predictions,' were too frequent to ignore.
I don't think that he did. He had to say that to protect Trump. He "took the bullet". Why would he lie about a totally benign
conversation (had it been something important, an ex-Director of the DIA and a Russian Ambassador would not have used on open,
insecure, line). No – Trump sacrificed him under political pressure. Disgusting.
My friend I do think this is an overreaction. I will be watching in the next few days to see if Flynn goes away quietly. Flynn
may take a vacation for a while. But when he's back, probably by the end of March, I expect him to start acting as a Trump surrogate
- and going after his Deep State adversaries with both barrels. Watch for leaks of memos warning John Brennan about the rise of
ISIS in 2014 or that TOW missiles and other US arms sent to 'moderate rebels' in Syria were flowing to Al Nusra/Qaeda if not ISIS.
If there is no pushback or punishment of the neocons in govmt through firings of WaPost/NYT sources and further exposure of neocon
complicity in the rise of Daesh, and if all the talk of detente with Russia comes to nought by summer, then I'll agree with this
analyses by the Saker.
I do concur that none of this makes much sense unless Flynn was carrying out his boss's orders to see if he could basically
cool off the confrontation Obama was deliberately creating with the Russians. It is hard to be a patriot who does the right thing
and has his name dragged through the mud for it, but at least Flynn is still young enough to fight back - together with his son
Mike Flynn Jr. who while not the most competent guy seems fiercely loyal to his dad.
The war to root out the neocons is a long one, and requires patience. If Trump is going to fight back, he needs ammo and allies
from within the Deep State prepared to nail some of their colleagues on their soft coup actions and arming of terrorists, among
other things. Putin had a critical mass of 'siloviki' who were prepared to do what needed to be done. Does Trump?
Remember when Varoufakis stepped aside and then what happened to Syriza. These people take no prisoners, obey no rule they just
apply pressure, there will be no respite they will pick another and then another. This is the beginning of the final showdown
between the corporate powers and the people, by proxy as a factional war, but the Saker is right they lose everything in winning
the first battle.
Read it in reverse, that is this group the core of US imperialism has had a minor setback with Trump, they are correcting it,
but their blunt force way in which they rule the world is now applied to the home state (the US). It is like using a sledge hammer
to crack an egg, it works but the results aren't useful.
Trump does not have an organisation behind him, he represents a set of interests larger than his associates, but together they
form a small faction that orbits the core power group. So Trump has a small tight web which is being pulled apart, and a large
popular tendrils from the base up to his group there is no coordinating centre that links these two.
So Trump is vulnerable and was always vulnerable, he may occasionally act interdependently, but he does not have a powerful
base so he looses, he must lose. That part is Obama part 2. However, what is incredible is the ineptness and weakness of the 'powerful
hub' that has changed since 2008.
Excessive hegemonic force spends itself by such complete mobilisation, it looses its coordinating ability by overusing it.
People wise up very fast now, illusions simply fall away, The real fight is now on the schedule, between the people's public interest
and cabal of private corporate interests.
If instead of taming or eliminating Trump they used him as a proxy to paper over the big problem,es and patch up the small
ones (Obama could not they owned him too well), then the regime would last longer, internally strengthen. Some, if not most of
what Trump is saying is not directed at people but at the core power group, he actually is a reformer of their more daft policies
- but they are too corrupt for that they only now know the course they are on and anything that suggests change is threat to their
control - that is weakness and it is showing internationally.
The empire is starting to deteriorate internally, the client states are floating away, Australia is so 'Hillary' bound that
there has been a US troop increase in Darwin (doubling thew strength) and a continued partisanship against Trump politically and
in the media -- we have always been so loyal to every US president until now, and that knot has been severed. This is happening
Internal to the US the last vestige of of connection between the people, which was the presidential office, and the state has
been fatally eroded. Soros has loosed the dogs, and when the participants sober up, they will not go back to their kennels to
be released again - forces are being spent recklessly. The media whose standing has been low fro a long time, has become a joke
that it cannot recover from, being ridiculed by the public is the last connection (the mainline media was the church of the modern
world - it is no longer).
So regardless of anyone's theory or thoughts, desires or dreams, society, world wide, has divided into two camps.
The fighting side, the side of apparent strength - "them" - have created "us". The accord that is civil society has been destroyed
by them, we are already in a period of civil war. We are many but lack coherence, all our power is potential there is nothing
that realises it. Anything they comes up now is new, virginal and can concentrate a lot of latent power. But this will only come
about when the old discords that kept us at each other's throats are allowed to fade away.
The irony is that Trump was their last best chance.
I agree. Flynn did what all good soldiers do and fell on his sword for the boss. You have to remember, Flynn probably represented
the faction of the elite that wanted to bring back reality. That elite is still there and Flynn can work with them behind the
scenes. Look at Roger Stone who left the campaign in August and has been working hard behind the scenes, mostly behind the scenes
with the alternative media (infowars) to great effect.
Flynn is a huge loss to Trump and the country. But the battle is not over yet. There were several times during the campaign
when I thought it was over but Trump just kept on winning against impossible odds.
I don't think Trump is tired of winning yet. And don't forget, his support grows a little every day.
It's not at all clear that Flynn's fall is such a great loss: Flynn and the colonels have a thing for Iran that will do no one
The colonels shaping Trump's Middle East policy
Underneath the drama and chaos of the Donald Trump White House - the rival power centers, combative press conferences mercilessly
mocked on Saturday Night Live, leaked transcripts of Trump's phone calls to allied leaders, and the often inflammatory tweeter-in-chief,
fuming over the latest perceived insult while watching "Morning Joe" - a cadre of deeply serious, tested military intellectuals
at the National Security Council is shaping Trump's Middle East policies.
Your hopes for the Trump administration were based on sentiment, not on political calculation. Trump is over his head.
The IMF meets April 21-23 in Wash DC. Quotas are up for review. A fall in the US quota of 16.53% (
) below 15% would eliminate the US veto on major actions that requires an 85% majority. The shake up in confidence in the
global monetary regime should not be underestimated. April may come in like a lamb, but it may not go out as one.
The Reshetnikov interview is a gem. Thanks for that. Russia appears to be a civilization pulling itself together and searching
for its cultural metaphors, as the man said:
"An Idea is what always wins, and if we do not offer an Idea but are offering just material values instead, we will only achieve
temporary solutions that are essentially failures.
. . .
Attempts at resolving the conflicts among the nations or the states using exclusively economic methods are doomed, that's is why
we are losing."
"It is difficult to avoid the impression that Flynn formed his ideas about Iran as a US intelligence officer during the
George W. Bush administration's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In both of those wars Iran and the US pursued parallel but often
conflicting strategies, with both countries seeking the defeat of fundamentalist Sunni Jihadis in Afghanistan and Iraq, but wanting
to prevent the other country from emerging the undisputed victor. The result was what might be called 'duplicitous cooperation',
with Iran and the US simultaneously working with and against each other in an often totally ruthless and treacherous way.
It is not difficult to see why against this background General Flynn as a front line intelligence officer might come
to see the Iranians as deceitful and treacherous, and conclude that they can't be trusted, and why he might develop an intense
loathing for them. Thus his interview with Al-Jazeera is peppered with comments like this
'I could go on and on all day about Iran and their behaviour, you know, and their lies, flat out lies, and then their spewing
of constant hatred, no matter whenever they talk.'"
Thank you for this summary Avarachan. Flynn was as much a warmonger as other Neo-Cons, he was just more focused on Iran and
friendlier towards Russia. The next goal in the US grand strategy in the mid-east is Iran though, and as such he was the choice
Trump went for when picking him. I think the Saker is overreacting a bit here, maybe he was hoping for more of a change under
D Trump, which I never expected, so this early ouster to me is not as shocking as to him.
This doesn't mean there wasn't any infighting in the deep state on organizational matters and raw power, but foreign policy
wise, I doubt this move will much alter the very pre-determined course of history. Iran has been singled out, Ryan used the term
'You have been put on notice', after a completely legal missile launch by Teheran and Trump's rhetoric with his Tweets towards
Teheran are saying as much. I don't get why anyone can't see that. To say the firing of Flynn alone was the breaking point
for Trump's administration, vastly over-estimates the president's wilingness or ability to take on the US deep-state. Had he wanted
to do so, why pick Pompeo as head of the CIA? Why cosy up to Saudi-Arabia?
Anyway, on the grand chess board of things a pawn just tumbled and fell, because the King would not protect him. But it
was just a pawn and the pieces will have to keep on moving.
As i said it from the beginning, this so called trump hype was way over exaggerated and this wishful thinking of Trump-Putin
duo saving the world was ridiculous. Putin's Russia is clearly rejecting the very foundation of what is the current USA, the petro
$, so unless Putin was planning to return Russia to it's 90's era Zio-colony, there could never have been a common ground between
Besides that there were also other signs like, an ex goldman sachs and soros fund management banker at the head of the
secretary treasury, the constant hammering by the media about trump (as contrary to the complete black out on someone like Dr
Clearly this is a "non événement" and just another nail in the US coffin.
At last the truth. I was getting fed up with all the Trump fans. He never did anything to deserve the adulation. Since being
in the whitehouse it has been a mess. He had not shown any foresight or strategic thinking. Whatever cards he had to play he wasted
He has employed a whole team of neocons and as for any Russian partnership with the USA this was never ever going to happen
– I don't even know why anyone would think so, There are too many differences. As for Flynn he was extremely anti Iranian how
is that good for Russia
Trump, like Nixon, has awoken the "silent majority" and has done us a great service by attacking political correctness. Trump,
like Nixon, had to surround himself with members of the tribe that owns Congress, in order to have a fighting chance of success.
Trump, like Nixon will not succeed, because the minefields were laid before he was sworn in.
The fact that outsider Trump has: exposed the internationalists, like Soros, for what they are; shown the "Antifa" hatefest
to be ridiculously shallow; and, exposed the political activism of the courts; will pay long term dividends for those who oppose
the current system.
My late Vietnam vet cousin predicted another revolution, but not in his lifetime. More of this treachery will only build the
pyre waiting for a spark.
I would not put too much significance to this - Trump was never some kind of knight in shining armor, but just the alternative
to Clinton. He may still do a few good things here and there, but the general thrust of his ideology - and yes he not simply transactional,
because US realism (realpolitik) in itself is an ideology (at the heart of capitalism and empire, in fact).
As for the neocons, one might recall the advice (Sun Tzu?) that one should never intervene when the enemy is making a mistake.
The deciding reason I voted for Trump is still holding - avoiding nuclear war, and it may yet hold for quite a while despite
the neocons, since Clinton is not in the driver's seat.
As for the economy, Trump, overall, will still bring it down, if simply by not averting the previously scheduled meltdown,
with further deregulation, corporate tax cuts, hand-outs to the rich, destruction of social welfare, and so on.
It is not so much that it is over as that it was never really there, except as a very remote dream. This is just shifting another
deck chair as we hit the iceberg, and all the great forces are still in play, albeit with the Clinton monster exorcised and sporting
a necklace of garlic. The situation itself has improved, however, with Trump winning, and with more people more awake than ever
in the last century. A lot more people can now see the iceberg.
Nice metaphors, blue! One after the other. And many cool under pressure comments I have read in this thread. That's comforting.
I can turn in and sleep soundly. I'm not joking. It's a war and when you realize it really is a war, and there is no easy,
quick "peace channel" to switch to, you may as well figure you more than likely won't live through this war, so you're already
a dead man or woman walking..
And just count your blessings if your grim assessment is wrong.
Can we have some some sense analysis now based on what is happening not what people want to happen
1. Ukraine escalation
2. NATO on Russia's borders
3. Exercises in the black sea
4. Anti Iranian rhetoric and sanctions
5. The smearing of Syrian govt by amnesty international
6. Unrest in Iraq – what is going on geolpolitical impact
7. Afghanistan – smearing or Russia
There is a whole list of issues that will impact Russia now can we talk about them instead of Trump
The environment around Russia has not improved and is set to get worse – Russia would be stupid to have relaxed its guard.
They need to behave as if Hillary was elected
There is not a no-fly-zone in Syria, and we are not composed of radioactive ash. That's quite significant. The president is
not all together but he is not the raging psychopath Clinton is. Let us be thankful for 'small blessings'. I don't recall anyone
promising a rose garden.
So pleased to find this commentary here after having felt pretty sick about this development ever since it was reported tonight.
Very grim. Have always thought that Trump did not pick the right close advisors in the beginning to protect him in what they had
to know was going to get ugly. Agree wholeheartedly with your assessment. I got nowhere earlier tonight trying to explain my similar
take to a few friends and family members. Nothing is going to save the US from its fate in the 11th hour. I find myself sometimes
thinking that the collective psyche in this country actually years for its own destruction.
That may be, but they were on the receiving of vast pots of excess USD courtesy of Kissingers' creation of the USD monopoly over
oil pricing/sales. A cynic would suggest that the subsequent rise of extremist jihadis was forseen and deemed to be useful for
the US/Anglo-Zionist Deep State.
Just to give everyone a laugh. It seems that 250 of the most experienced Ukraine ATO forces have been sent to the Congo – to
act as peacekeepers! Orwell is not only turning over in his grave, he is spinning sufficiently rapidly to give us free unlimited
energy if we could only harness it.
"Orwell is not only turning over in his grave, he is spinning sufficiently rapidly to give us free unlimited energy if we could
only harness it."
Thank you sir, best comment of the year. :) Yes my friends, this is a war and it's gonna get ugly. Things are not moving in the
Israel is also created by the west. The only enemy of the "west" is anybody that opposes them. See Iran, China, Russia, etc. Now
enemies of the people, not crooked govs, is a different story. My enemy is NOT Russia, China, Iran but the Zionist and wahabis.
From what I read Trump was mad at Flynn for two reasons. First he thinks in retrospect that the immigration ban he was pushed
to sign by his advisors was a botched legal job. I guess that includes Flynn. Second it seems Flynn did lie to Trump about this,
and I can't see this flyîg with Trump.
Key Trump assets are hiring/firing and negociating. Maybe Flynn wasn't up for the job. I'll wait to see who he picks instead
before making any call.
"I'll wait to see who he picks instead before making any call." Exactly. The Saker is normally 'strategically' a few days/weeks
late on response to tectonic shifts here he seems disappointed and early. For those of us with a HCIS (High Cynical Index
Syndrome) Trump and his circus clowns were simply a lesser flop than Clinton and her criminal gang.
Different finger puppets in the kid's burger: same business hand on the till(er), imo.
Happy to disagree with Saker this time – Trump is, thus far, a proven entity. He replaced his campaign director in his " hopeless
" campaign with just 4 months left to election day with Bannon and Conway and they knocked it out of the park. Trump has a good
eye for talent and I am almost sure he'll find someone like-minded as Kelly in relatively short order.
The good captain is revealed in the storm. Trump will do what he can. It's up to us to set our jaws and move forward. OK –
the deep state has declared war; Molon Labe.
Hi Peter, I'm glad to find you here again. Regarding the hearings, I have watched them also, my first impression was that they
were like some Gestapo hearings in the Third Reich times. And as you said, everyone had to say something to satisfy the Committee
in order to get their approval. Actually, all of them have been cornered.
Flynn was already compromised by the very neocon elements of which you write: Michael Ledeen. Also, Flynn isn't the only
one who can serve unflinchingly in this position. But, the Trump team will have to look beyond the tight circle of ideologues
with no governance experience in order to find a suitable replacement. And yes, I do have some suggestions.
I have a feeling all that anti-Iran rhetoric, like the anti-Russia rhetoric by all of Trump's candidates in their hearings (that
Trump claimed was just them speaking their own mind, irrespective of his expressed core views), is for getting Trump's team in
place without too much resistance by his own Republicans who are, after all, sworn to the neocon/Zionist order. (Who would know
that better than you, Dr McKinney?}
That means Flynn's participation in the book coauthored with Ledeen was perhaps a ruse. Sure, he could subscribe to the theoretical
part that condemns Wahhabism in support of traditional Islam (as Ledeen, the neocon, would pretend to do, to look human). But
the operative part took issue with not just Iran but also with Russia for their supposed support to 'terrorism'. So it looks like
the whole thing was for show. Trump could have stuck it out with support for Flynn. I think there might have been other considerations.
(Flynn's son was earlier an embarrassment with his pursuit of Pizzagate.) If the Saker has privileged knowledge about the critical
and indispensable role of Flynn, now is the time to come out with it.
As I expressed under Redford (February 14, 2017 at 8:56 am UTC) I'll wait to see the next move.
However, if as the Saker implies, Flynn was a key knight on Trump's board then perhaps he now has other 'duties' and freedoms
to work across certain lines. Russians leaving the military to 'free lance' in the south east corners of the Ukraine come to mind.
In any case, one step back is sometimes a strategic move for another day. And if such a screw up then why isn't John F. Tefft
taking some heat for letting the trap be set?
Trump is muddling along and his approach (so far) reminds me of Deng Xiaoping's "crossing the river by feeling the stones"
The task of reforming the corrupt and evil saturated DC swamp can't be any less complicated than transforming China out of
I suspect Putin et al are just shrugging their shoulders and knocking another green bottle of the wall.
And I would add, the counter argument to your neutered Trump, although I agree reasonable, is the clear signal that "You're
fired!" applies to all and everyone. I doubt Pence is 100% bullet proof, nor beyond sacrifice if needs be.
REMINDER "The dangerous deception called the Trump presidency."
"I state clearly my conviction, and please recall this as Trump Presidency policies unfold after January 20, 2017 to see if
I am correct or not: Donald Trump was put into office to prepare America for war, a war the banks of Wall Street and the US military
industrial complex are not presently in a position economically or industrially or otherwise, geopolitically, to win. His job
will be to reposition the United States for them to reverse the trend to disintegration of American global hegemony, to, as the
Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz Project for the New American Century put it in their September, 2000 report, "rebuild America's defenses."
" (F. William Engdahl)
No all empires fall from Rome to Spain to England and we are in the final days of the empire, bankrupt with a stagnant GDP and
a 100,000,000 unemployed and poverty on the rise. For the first time since 1960 I didn't bother to vote for the country is not
governed by those we elect, but those in the shadows that pull the string's as Chalmers Johnson said in his last book in the series"
Dismantling The Empire" that it was "Americas Last Best Hope", and I agree with the Saker that hope is gone and its going to be
a very long rough ride to the bottom with wars and rumors of war
Thanks for the great post Mr Saker, insightful as always. Being of Serbian descent I never had a real interest in US politics
as nothing would change when it came to our political interests, be they historically or morally correct.
Naturally I despised the Bushes, especially the Clintons and like many supported Trump despite never truly believing he would
succeed. We truly are in a historical moment in time and I share your thoughts regarding the "Color Revolution" currently under
way in the US.
It appears the powers that be are positioning themselves to remove him from office and I sadly predict that President Trump
will lose out to the establishment who are hell bent to see his agenda destroyed!
My optimism that President Trump would bring about true change has been shattered by his somewhat reluctance to challenge those
enemies within his own "party" and administration.
Sadly I only see this going one way and that is with President Trump walking away from this position in the foreseeable future
as it is obvious the enemies abroad and within are determined to see him removed. He's clearly over his head and the establishment
would happily see VP Pence and the Republican trash continue the neocon agenda and ultimately draw us that step closer to war
I never thought I would share the sympathies with the American people but the recent elections have demonstrated clearly to
the world that despite all the posturing and illusions, the US is far from being a beacon of hope, freedom and prosperity. I truly
believe President Trump genuinely wishes to "MAGA" but the opposition is too strong and with Flynn's resignation it's clear his
team are working covertly to sabotage his presidency.
For the sake of world peace I pray that President Trump succeeds but my heart tells me he will falter and step aside allowing
the enemy to continue to policies of death, suffering and enslavement of the American people.
In finishing I share your views regarding the unfolding developments and wish you and your family safety and continued success
with the site. My apologies for the long post
Trump was brought in to trigger the world wide financial collapse and start war. Earlier Obama was brought in to the chant Hope
I would give it a maximum of 4 months time before the earth caves in.
Well you're right about almost everything here Saker.
One slight quibble, I suggest Trump has always been setup man for a long planned US colour revolution, though I am fairly certain
he was personally unaware of it, just as he was unaware he would win the election.
Nasrallah has it right. Trump is a limited character, a one term President at best. Most of us will be only too glad to
be fooled again when Ms. Gabbard makes it to position 1 or 2 on the next Democratic Presidential ticket.
Democracy has always been a cloak for the oligarchy.
I always knew that hopes in Trump are baseless. I am actually happy about development, we already reach point where the war is
the only escape, there's no other way around. It does NOT mean we gonna have a nuclear war, Hitler could use chemical warfare
during battle for Stalingrad. He didn't use it., so neocons will not dare either, and if they do, well, a new beginning.
Well, Stalin, I confess I did have hope and still have some till Trump will meet Putin personally. (a few days ago, Putin said
that he would meet Trump in Slovenia – that made to have some bad feelings) . If nothing positive comes out, then the war shall
solve all the problems (as continuation of policy with other means )
I guess you heard that picture of Russian ambassador's assassination won World Press Photo award. Disgrace!, they deserve the
war. They are spoil brats, they will cry like little children. After all is done we send Chechen to clean the swamps.
Trump is the periphery displacing the centre in a Corporate dictatorship, it is the same when the Grand Council of Fascism
ousted Mussolini and arrested him, as Trump did to Hillary Clinton's turn, but the real power exerts itself to reverse the decision.
Trump appeases because that is all that is allowed him, his victory was measured in days, and so perhaps was Obama's. Probably
there have been direct threats, this is common when anybody steps out of line with the empire, blackmail (based on real or fictitious
evidence is also common), and bribes - these are not alternatives they come all at once. Being threatened, blackmailed and bribed
is a common enough gangster's tactic. Then of course there are the favours, the often fake evidence of misdeeds done by the closet
allies, who ride to the rescue their own fifth column having prepared the way for them. None of this excuses Trump, he uses similar
but milder tactics.
The weakness is leadership, relying on it, the saviour complex, that somehow someone will blaze the way forward and change
things for us, the beaten and oppressed. It is not happening, either we take the initiative or we fix up the mess once the whole
thing has exploded - we get all the danger and all the work no matter what.
I am an Australian, my country has been run by yours since 1975 after we enjoyed three years of Independence from the US and
Britain, after '75 we got US gangster-ism - no velvet glove. so my point of view is so-long as the empire collapses all is well.
Trump was a faction, there is civil war in the US between the big and little barons. Let both destroy each other.
Trouble is when giants fight little people get squashed. The empire has been squashing people by the millions for half
a century (and before that). So I have indifference as to who gets hurt, I just want it to stop. If the US people are the last
victims, then so be it.
The alternative is that the people of the US do everyone a favour including themselves and take these fascists out. I use the
term in its exact meaning as corporatism (where corporations and the state become a joint enterprise, fostering a class of managers
in its wake). I also acknowledge something very few here have heard - this includes social fascists.
Back in the thirties there were right wing fascists and also left wing 'social' fascists, you might recognise this in George
Orwell's 1984. The fact is the liberals (social fascists par excellence) have buried this, while the militant right wing fascists
have been distanced from brethren by being described as Nazis. Neo-Nazis are detestable, but strangely enough are not actually
fascists so much as criminal gangs (there is a difference).
Left and right don't make much sense when the enemy has its own left and right. So there are the corporatists (fascists ) and
us, the people.
So without leaders the people need to push and push hard, otherwise the next lot of cannon fodder will be you, not the client
states, but the home state of ultra-imperialism. You do the world a favour by doing yourself a favour.
My suggestion is open rebellion means unsuccessful slaughter, guns are not going to work. The common weapon sounds like a joke,
and it is a joke as it now stands - the Law. Make the corporates subject to the law. And the first effort is not the corporates,
but the judges - the judicial system needs to be purged first, and from the bottom up.
Look for corruption, look for tax evasion, conflicts of interests anything that should qualify a judgement for acting in the
people's interest and get rid of them. Never mind their sex lives, or opinions, just whether they would be fit to judge cases
of corporate fraud, tax fraud, misappropriations of funds, running corporations against the interests of shareholder dividend
payout, corruption etc.,
Start the pressure locally, start with the local collaborators, ignore the higher ups, get to them later. If you are right
work with lefties if you're a lefty work with right-wingers, work across the spectrum, but get the judges on the people's side
by getting rid of the others - not issue based politics, but on facts, those that hobnob with the local bigwigs instead of the
people, of belonging to a club where where business does private deals.
Start doing the little things that will make local self-organisation possible and the key is not the police, not the politicians,
but the judiciary. Gather evidence, and when it sufficient make it public and demand legal remedies, and if none come, then some
Your recommendations in the last para are wise. Unfortunately, Trump & team lack the required skill, and they thought they should
go for the CIA first. So not, there they are: le bec dans l'eau as the French say
RMM thanks. Trump could never provide what is needed. My view is that getting things right comes after getting rid of what is
wrong. even if Trump was perfect with the perfect team and large coordinated popular support, he could not get things right, because
of the attrition of the corrupt, and if these are 'fixed' politically rather than legally society suffers. New laws are basically
a political fix.
Redeploying existing laws, applying them to corporate entities and gaoling offenders is how a civil society works. First reform
the lower judiciary, they will deal with rather small corporate misdeeds, but they will arrest criminals, who will be systematically
let off by higher courts, which makes them the target for coordinated reform.
The elimination of corrupt judiciary, the promotion of honest magistrates creates a dual power in the modern world, the old
way was to organise force for a showdown, I am suggesting winning a war of attrition, not movement - they are weak there, anything
else will be brutally suppressed.
I feel terribly ill this morning. It's a disaster. Especially when I read, with horror, that Trump consider . PETRAEUS(!!!!!!!!)
for the job!! It's amazing.
Why not Nuland or Kagan as State Secretary and Breedlove as Defens Secretary?
And what's about Bannon? I can't imagine that and Trump and Bannon are both totaly stupid and unaware.
Engdhal and Brandon Smith, for month and month warn that Trump is a fake from head to toes. Are they right.
If it is, we'll soon see new tension with Russia and especially in Donbass. And if it's true, we'll see mainstream medias becoming
very nice indulgent with Trump. Then, all the "liberals" and "progressists" who are shouting everywere again "Trump the fascist"
will soon realise they're cuckold, the medias batteries will now turn against them and they will very soon test what is the true
fascism. It's a tragedy.
If Trump is sincere, without Flynn to protect him against the services, he's dead. If Trump is a fake
Trump is the perfect President for America – ignorant, arrogant and lost – but sensing that something is not right. I am at peace
since my father always told me: "Remember, even the best of them are snakes."
Saker's frustration is understandable. Seeing your hopes dashed is always painful. But the few Cassandras (yours truly among them)
who had no hope whatsoever that anything good can possibly come out from making "America great again" kept their calm. We took
the cold shower and puked in advance. 'We told you so' and in no uncertain terms:
William Engdahl ("The Dangerous Deception Called The Trump Presidency"):
"The project called the Trump Presidency has just two months before its formal beginning. Yet already the hopes and fantasies
of much of the world are making him into something and someone Donald Trump most definitely is not. Donald Trump is yet another
project of the same boring old patriarchs who try again and again to create a one world order that they control absolutely, a
New World Order that one close Trump backer once referred to as universal fascism. Ignore the sometimes fine rhetoric in some
of his speeches. Talk is cheap. If we consider rather the agenda that's taking form even in these very early days of cabinet naming,
we can see that Donald Trump is the same agenda of war and global empire as Obama, as Bush before him, as Bill Clinton and Clinton's
"tutor", George H.W. Bush before him. There is no good side to what the world is about to experience with President Trump."
And people refuse to see the elephant trumping through the rooms of the Trump Tower (and now of the White House), blinded by
the 'glamour' of Ivanka or the 'Sois belle et tais-toi' Melanie (excuse my French).
But we keep calm because we are sure that if amateur analysts could see through the fog of deception, the Russians saw
it long before. Be sure that all counter-measures are in place.
Remember that Trump has still plenty of options left. The fate of the US or, for that matter, of the world does not depend on
mr Flynn whose judgement has shown so wanting that he would not have been the person to take down the bad elements among CIA et
al anyhow. I trust in Trump's fighting spirit and resilience, and I expect general Flynn's resignation just to be a jump start
to take on neocon elements in US governement and intelligence community seriously and, this time, hard and harsh. With whom in
the lead, I don't know, but remember that the US is a vast country with lots of folk competent and willing to accept the job of
draining the intelligence part of the swamp.
Even though I respect The Saker's opinion to a very high degree, I will have to disagree with some of the assertions made here.
But first of all, allow me to begin with what I agree with. This is no doubt a major victory for the neocons, the Deep State
and the EU. This is a loss for Russia and the USA.
But, I'm not sure that Trump is done and dusted. From what I realize, Flynn did in fact breach protocol and the Deep State
found a perfect opportunity to go on the offensive. It's still within Trump's power to appoint one of his own to replace Flynn.
But my main disagreement with The Saker is this. Trump (and his backers, themselves a minority within the Deep State) is not
interested in cutting a deal with Russia due to any concerns about Wahabism, the neocons or any other such. Trump's reason for
wanting to withdraw the US from the NATO-GCC-ISR attack on Russia, was because he wanted to divert US power and energies against
China and Iran. Trump also believes that the US is not getting anything out of its unconditional support for the EU and wanted
to rearrange America's posture.
The neocons, neoliberals and Eurocrats who oppose Trump so vehemently, believe that the EU project is sacrosanct (because it
weakens and undermines Russia) that Iran should be brought on their side and used against Russia (only the most Zio-fanatics are
not find of this proposition) and that China can only be faced down after Russia has been annihilated. If Russia cannot be defeated,
then China must only be militarily contained (so that the PRC does not turn towards Russia in a serious way) and the "Free World"
can only hope that China may collapse under its own contradictions. For the US Deep State, Russia must be fought against to the
most bitter end, and on this, the Europeans are in enthusiastic agreement.
We'll see how this turns out, but this development is nothing but deeply worrying. It would be stupid to sugarcoat this.
I always thought that "The Empire was, is and will be the Empire" and the president is merely the figurehead of this very Empire.
That was obvious president after president, "beautifully depicted" by president Obama. To really make any changes you'd need a
revolution which is totally outside the mental conceptions of Western peoples today, last not least lacking leading figures who
could organize the people. Similarly, dreaming about Trump changing the world for a better one was an illusion right from the
start. These who have always driven this ship along will, of course, now drive Trump. So apart from a lot of shallow noise, what
has changed? Nothing. And if that is correct it is still the better solution of whatever might be in the offing.
Trump is a trickster. His job is not to make America great again – an impossible task anyway, as the Masonic project 'America
as the New Atlantis' was a con job from the get go and was, like any film set, built primary as an eye candy and for temporarily
use only. The ZWO needed the USA as the launch pad, staging ground and propaganda central for almost resistance-less military-industrial
subjection of the vast, still virgin goy-lands sprinkled all over planet Earth.
Who cared about the enslavement of South America, Africa, South East Asia, Bolshevik Russia, Maoist China as long Hollywood
kept spinning out blockbuster after blockbuster, as long as NASA made everybody proud with their staged moon landings, as long
as CIA lifetime actors like Elvis Presley, Bob Dylan, Jack Nicholson, Ernest Hemingway, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk
dazzled our eyes and minds with magic too good to be true.
Now that the project is almost complete and the USA bankrupt beyond repair, the ZWO faces the tricky task of ushering in a
rougher phase, while making sure the blame doesn't fall on them, but on conspiracy theorists!, Nazis!, White Supremacists!, Fake
News bloggers!, sexists!, racists! and what not.
That is where Trump comes in. All he has to do is to upset the apple cart. Saying some right words at wrong time. And some
wrong things at the right time. Taking the wrong decisions at appropriate moments. Playing the joker not once, but again and again.
This is the best we can hope for now. And Trump – Inshallah! – will deliver.
I was always cautiously optimistic about Trump. My expectations of his were rather modest. Of course, the very first thing that
recommended him was the simple fact he is not Hillary. The second, perhaps, was his unortodox approach and what seems (still in
the present, I think) to be a genuine desire to shake the establishment currently pulling the string in Washington.
He had some profound statements that were previously unthinkable from any US President (we'll stop toppling regimes).
Taking all of that into consideration, and assuming that Trump has been sincere, there was always a huge problem for him: he
is completely alone. He has no reliable allies to help him even start the battle with the power elite governing the US.
From his first day in office, it was clear they were going to oppose him at every step and Trump has little or no means to fight
I generally appreciate and agree with the Saker, but I think he is overly pessimistic here.
In my view, Trump has already showed to be willing to fight, but the resistance is too great for one man to handle. And Trump
is, more or less, alone.
It is naive from the get go to think that Trump will undo the Neocons' agenda that started since 911! Trump from the beginning
should have made sure the backings of the majority of the American people including the immigrants, remain neutral on Muslim issues,
Russia, any policies that the fake liberals would have reason to antagonize him with, in order to minimize protests against him,
like the fake Obama and Clintons. Once elected, he could then implement his policies. His administration and presidency campaign
may have been sabotaged from the get go so that they have reason to blame him with afterwards.
Flynn resigned during PM Abe's visit and when N Korea fired the missiles. Could these be the reason for his resignation instead
I deeply admire and respect The Saker. But I think this time you rushed into final conclusions , while the game is just in its
first few shots. Trump still has infinite ammo : he can replace the hell out of whoever he wants to. He won't behave as a loser
and cower down.
There'll be counter-attacks , plenty I believe. He's calling the shots, not the neo-cons. Mattis clearly states he hates wars,
and he is not a traitor ; he was put there to shield Trump – and he obviously agreed – while "barking war" for domestic consumption
towards keeping quiet the warmonger crowd. Smokes and mirrors game. I think the core plan is still in place.
I don't always agree with the Saker, but this time I do. The resignation of Flynn suggests that he was pushed out by the neocons
and that Trump was unable – not unwilling – to prevent the push. Flynn's lie, or cover-up is neither here nor there; it's not
the reason he had to resign. Trump has been left relatively isolated within his own administration. Unless he sacks some key figures,
he will be politically vulnerable. So, Flynn's departure is probably a sign of things to come: more neo-conservativism, more
empire building, and more neoliberalism: back to the Washington Consensus – which never really disappeared.
"The resignation of Flynn suggests that he was pushed out by the neocons and that Trump was unable – not unwilling – to prevent
the push. "
I agree with this. I don't have evidence. But I think there must be more to the story. As for the telephone call, so what?
What about the Iran-Contra meetings in Paris that sank Carter by getting a promise out of the Iranians not to free the hostages
until Reagan was being sworn in? Same deal. Has anyone told Trump about that? Why not just say: Hey, there is no difference, guys!
If that was OK, so was Flynn's call to Russia to say "hello, and we plan to be friends wijoo." What is, actually, wrong with that?
There must be some other pressure on Trump. This is probably Trump's last chance to get a powerful loyalist near him. He has
made it easy for his enemies on the left and right with the Bannon appointment, immigration ban, and wild words re Iran, etc.
Didnt Flynn accuse Hillary Clinton of being involved in chip trafficking around the time of the Pizzagate shooter? I've also
read that the new media face of the Trump campaign, Stephen Miller is somehow involved with the nonsense going on behind the scenes
in the WH. Is it possible these things are related?
Trump's daughter Ivanka and his son in law Jared Kushner are apparently Lubavitch Jews. That seems even more relevant to Trump's
weakness than Pence or anything much else. It was a group of Lubavitch rabbis who persuaded George Bush Junior to sign the so
called "Noahide Laws" into American Law – which I find astounding, to put it mildly.
These so called "laws" demand the beheading of all people who practice "idolatry" . According to them I think the only religion
on Earth which does not allow any kind of idolatry is Islam (perhaps also the Jains). Christianity definitely, according to these
sinister people, practices idolatry in the form of The Cross and pictures of Jesus and so forth.
There have been rumors for years now about "fema camps", but there are also photographs and videos of long white painted trains
with UN painted on the sides. They are three storied carriages or cabooses with flat beds in between every few of these. Someone
got into these carriages, years ago, and said that there are metal benches in them with ankle irons fixed to the floors.
On the flat beds guillotines were seen – "made in China".
Which all makes my blood run cold. These Lubavitch really are as sinister as the original Levites!
@Ivanka and his son in law Jared Kushner are apparently Lubavitch Jews.
They definitely are. That was a 'secret' only to the extent that nobody wanted to see it, although the sickening details were
all over the place:
"Trump was raised Presbyterian. Before her wedding, in July 2009, after studying for over a year with Rabbi Elie Weinstock
from the Modern Orthodox Ramaz School, she converted to Orthodox Judaism and took the Hebrew name "Yael". She describes her conversion
as an "amazing and beautiful journey" and that her father supported her studies from day one, due to his respect for the Jewish
religion. She attests to keeping a kosher diet and observing the Jewish Sabbath, saying in 2015: "We're pretty observant It's
been such a great life decision for me I really find that with Judaism, it creates an amazing blueprint for family connectivity.
From Friday to Saturday we don't do anything but hang out with one another. We don't make phone calls."Trump sends her daughter
to kindergarten at a Jewish school in New York City. She says that "It's such a blessing for me to have her come home every night
and share with me the Hebrew that she's learned and sing songs for me around the holidays." (Wikipedia)
"Trump vowed to be an advocate for women and Israel. Regarding her father's support for Israel, Trump said he would be "an
unbelievable champion for Israel and for the Jewish people. You will not be disappointed."@http://www.algemeiner.com/2016/10/28/ivanka-trump-at-florida-synagogue-my-father-called-before-jewish-high-holidays-and-said-you-better-pray-hard-for-me/
"The biblical story of Esther is an imperfect allegory for the Trump family, but as for Ivanka, the comparison isn't half bad.
Esther is a Jewish woman who conceals her identity when she becomes the bride of a powerful king. It is only when she reveals
who she is that she can save the Jewish people from an evil adviser plotting their destruction.
Like Esther, Ivanka might appear to be nothing more than a pretty face until she shows that she's the savviest person in the
room. Like Esther, Ivanka has a familial, almost accidental position of influence with a powerful gentile political figure. And
like Esther, Ivanka's Jewishness is veiled: Something she describes as an important part of her identity and family life-she's
an Orthodox convert, but she rarely agrees to talk about her faith-is essentially invisible to those who don't know it's there".She's
the Orthodox daughter of David Duke's favorite candidate for president-and a perfect cipher for the anxiety of assimilation.@https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/what-should-american-jews-make-of-ivanka-trump/498476/
So much for David Duke!
"Ynetnews reports: Businesswoman Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner have purchased a home in Washington DC in preparation
for President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration. As a practicing Jewish couple, their impending move also necessitated joining
a local synagogue. They Chose TheSHUL, a small synagogue run by international the Chabad Jewish community and outreach organization.
Rabbi Levi Shemtov heads TheSHUL, which has a congregation of 40 – 60 members, among them former senator Joe Lieberman, current
Secretary of Treasury Jack Lew as well as several former ambassadors and Israeli dignitaries".
It was never so 'in your face'. Other overlooked detail: 'World's Largest Jewish Center in Dnepropetrovsk', 'Dnepropetrovsk
could be renamed – Jerusalem-on-the-Dnieper'
Would Trump abandon Ukraine?
And why do you explain that, for example, Scott, who is always researching about Chabad Lubavitch, have overlooked this? And,
has been this information just discovered today, or the so much informed people here knew it in advance and, in spite, promoted
Trump as if there was not tomorrow, you included?
I essentially agree with the premise that the conflict between the Establishment and Trump is basically over Trump being elected
as someone who didn't rise through, and was not acculturated in a conventional Establishment political milieu. I further agree
that Flynn's resignation represents an important Establishment victory. However, the notion that Donald Trump represented the
last chance to avert a major US meltdown, that he aspired to significantly change the path our capitalist system is pursuing,
is quite frankly, hyperbole. You endow Donald Trump with undeserved importance.
Donald Trump does not represent now, nor did he ever, a challenge to the prevailing neo-liberal system. Even if he had
parried Establishment's previous challenges, or goes to ultimately push back successfully against existing and future challenges
to his policies, there will not be a historical, significant change to ruling class domestic policies. Any alteration in US foreign
policies, would be selective, and would not persist in the long term. Donald Trump, for all his idiosyncrasies, is very much a
ruling class individual, possessing ruling class ideology.
Reorganization of the national security agencies, relegating the power of the CIA to the Executive, bringing some measure of
common sense to America's foreign policies vis a vis the Russian Federation, pulling back on America's bloated and unsustainable
military engagements, while welcome, would not amount to a material and long-term change to the nature of the American system
and its empire.
Working people would have lived, and will still live, in a society with inadequate and worsening healthcare, housing, education,
and public infrastructure,;and with declining unionization rates and collective bargaining power in the workplace. They would
and will still pay taxes to a government which would expend those funds on a gargantuan and growing military budget; and on assistance
to giant corporations. They would and will continue to be indoctrinated by a government and mass media with neo-liberal and bourgeois
ideology. Nothing critical would have, or will change, under a Donald Trump administration.
Foreign policy is shaped by the economic nature of the beast. America under Donald Trump, or any other candidate of the "two"
party system, in the long-term must pursue policies which continue to inject excess revenue into the system. That revenue represents
value extracted from other countries. Otherwise, the economic engine of the US will not expand, and the system will soon collapse
upon itself. Inevitably, the dynamic of the system engenders conflict with any foreign power or powers which stand in its way.
That is why any lessening of conflict with Russia or China or any other major actor on the world stage would be purely temporary,
and selective in nature.
Donald Trump was no one's last hope. Don't bestow upon him a significance he does not deserve.
In other words, Trump is not of the crazies in the basement, but one the crazies on the main floor, as we had before GW Bush.
The only solution looks to me to be distributed leadership (real anarchy - no chiefs) and not looking for 'leaders' and 'heroes'
to save the day. It has parallels with using relational (table driven) databases instead of the older hierarchical databases -
a different model of organization.
Unfortunately, most people can't yet conceive of or understand how this works on large scale - although they use it all the
time among a group of friends which do things by consensus, and some people do it in worker-run businesses (which often takes
a lot of adjustment for people to get the hang of).
This is an excellent article. Very realistic and precise. The thin hopes on Trump just got "wafer thin", and it looks like we
will all be in for a ride. So be it. Better to face the sad truth than fool ourselves. GREAT analysis, I will share.
Greetings, and thanks and for work,
And perhaps it was never really about hope, but about many people just just keeping on working - and if one wants some hope one
can find it in all those people who do.
In consolation to Mike Flynn leaving take a look at this: Why Mike Flynn leaving was actually good for Trump by ex-CIA Robert
Steele ..(not just a paper pusher he was actually clandestine for 10 of his years in intelligence work) -Robert Steele: Dick Cheney,
Not Donald Trump, Orchestrated Firing of Mike Flynn. Flynn Deserved to Be Fired, But Not for Talking to Russians--
I also want to mention the fantastic new book by the Legendary Dmitri Orlov – and an see why he is spoken of as legendary. It
is called "Shrinking the Technocracy." Not to read this book would be a great loss.
Let me be clear. If it is true that It is illegal for private citizens to conduct US diplomacy (as BBC writes), then the past
December Flynn-Russia's ambassador Kislyak phone conversation should not occur anyway before he was officially appointed National
Considering the hysterical activity and agitation of the neocons/deep state and their russophobia, they would not loss any
minimal pretext to attack Trump and his collaborators. The question is: was the ambassador aware of that? With no clear benefits
from such early talk, it should have appeared as a possible trap, planted for a "delayed" explosion. As indeed it has been. The
results is that now Flynn had to resign And Kislyak?
The problem is that Flynn lied on the highest level. It's not a problem to have a phone conversation with the Russians or be Russian
friendly. The problem is when you claim it hasn't happened. Flynn should've known better. His resignation is not a sign of the
deep state taking over, but a logic consequence after breaking the trust.
He didn't claim it didn't happen, and he didn't break any trust. As said at the Duran, it's a concoction - a pretense. The main
purpose of the call was apparently to start arrangements between Trump and Putin and get some conversation started, and there's
nothing wrong with that - except for the 'neo'-crazies who insist on making Russia an enemy. This accusation is abut the same
as accusing Russia of invading Crimea. There is a technical term for it in political science: horse-s**t.
It isn't the deep state trying to take over, BTW, but one of the factions therein. The US is in a political (and cultural)
I have been saying to everyone I know and posting on FB since Hillary entered the race it looks to me like the globalists could
get more of what they want faster with Trump in the Whitehouse than with Hillary because they would have a better chance at destroying/blaming
the liberty movement for the fiscal/social collapse planned. The only way to prevent the new administration from avoiding its
promise to return power to the people is pro-liberty Americans opposing elected officials that were never drained from the swamp
when they embrace globalism for the globalist plan abandoning pro-liberty legislation. How long can President Trump, his administration
and America continue to endure so much subversion? There are endless criminal corrupt globalist organizations behind endless subversion's
openly against America/Trump
• CFR & Foundations behind the U.N. Agenda's 21/2030/2050
• EU parliament
• Planned Parenthood
• All population control organizations
• George Soros and everything he funds
• The leaders of the global warming/climate change movement
• The mainstream media in the West that are controlled by global elites.
• The LGBT/feminist movements backed by the U.N..
• American public education institutions.
• The Vatican using Pope Francis openly laying the groundwork for a moral and religious case in favor of population control, all
for totalitarian world government control
• The world's largest corporations and multi-billionaires
• Militant Islam
• All of Obama's Czars and thousands of other globalists like Obama working openly and not openly subverting America.
Folks, think about it, Trump's campaign had a hole in it from the beginning; the contradiction of Russia Vs Israel. The relationship
between those two nations is paradox: Russia contradicts what Israel wants in the ME. Trump can't be pro Russia and pro Israel
at the same time. If he supports Israel fully, he has to oppose Russia's involvement in Syria and Iran. Besides, The encirclement
of Russia by NATO also involves Zionists. The irony is that, most Jews in Israel come from Russia and yet, they antagonize Russia.
Is being anti Russia from the beginning the work of Zionists or the West? Hope some here can answer this for me. Who benefits
from being Anti Russia? I believe Zionists and the West may have huge benefit from elliminating Russia so that they can scramble
Russia's resource and land.
That being said, Trump's base is his supporters, unless they come out in full force to protect him and make neocons back off,
he will further be controlled by the Neocons and Zionists. Already, Trump is backing on issues such as One China policy, not having
US embassy in Jerusalem (probably a signal for Zionists to oust Trump) .
The problem of firing/getting rid of someone for being "too pro-russian" is that this empowers anti-russian paranoia, Mccartism,
and you never know who is next. This is a field day for those looking for russians under the beds.
Trump is an idiot because he endangered himself, as he too can be seen as "too pro russian". He could be next. If Flynn lost
his post for being too pro-russian, why not Trump too? He could be next.
The deplorables don't want war and on some level (sex, "Christian values") respect Putin as a straight shooter and despise
all of our crooked arrows when they make any comparison. If Trump had not said what he said about Russia and Putin during the
campaign, he never would have gotten 10% as far as he got. You can't be afraid of your shadow. If you are, you're just a dead
man walking, and you may as well jump into your grave and pull the lid over your coffin.
Keep pushing on "Russia is OK with me" the McCarthy record is already severely scratched and is even a broken record with a
lot of Americans, and it's becoming a sad joke to many of them. They're sick of those pulling this mind control chain. It's ridiculous,
and more and more Americans realize it every day. Escalate till the chains break on many millions more, whose minds have been
weak enough to put up with this nonsense for far too many decades.
The trump regime really should be called the pence regime, since it is obvious now that pence manages it and trump is mostly
the "showman" mouth and face.
The conversation of flynn and the Russian ambassador being the cause seems to me to be a phony reason. I speculate the
real reason is something else. It could be about Russian relations, in which case, maybe flynn was actually more open to warming
these, and pence/trump were not (trump having lied). They had a disagreement and flynn left.
It also could be about something else entirely, other policies flynn was tasked to work on, even a personality clash between
flynn and pence.
It is also possible the israelis ordered flynn's resignation for reasons unknown by me. They've done this before, and this
whole scenario has a strong deja vu feel. Remember Andrew Young? They got him fired in almost the exact same manner, hyping a
conversation he had with a Palestinian in their zio-gay media and forcing carter to fire him. Only in Young's case, mossad spied
on him and leaked info about Young's meeting with Palestinians to the zio-gay media.
Perhaps mossad has something on flynn, they certainly spied on him. Regardless, perhaps they found out something, not necessarily
to do with Russia, they didn't like. With zionazis, pet goys have to be 100% unequivocally loyal or they're out.
vt – didn't you ever see the video interviews of Kay Griggs ? Military Intelligence Wife Whistleblower – look it up –
Flynn must be involved in some of that cult stuff – its really bad – no one wants to hear about it but there's so much pedophilia
of young princes – Saudis – and then they are forever silenced – and Flynn being where he is in the Military Intelligence community
– must have at least known it was going on
It's just a dispute between 2 factions of the Zionist empire with Trump representing the more cautious faction. It is
good he has been defeated this way so all the fools who think he could make any deals will have those illusions crushed. Even
if his faction made deals they would be broken the second his faction is pushed out of power anyway, so such deals are worthless,
just like the NATO pact not moving east.
Michael Flynn resigned late on Monday after revelations he had discussed U.S. sanctions on Russia with the Russian ambassador
to the United States before Trump took office and misled Vice President Mike Pence about the conversations.
"It's obvious that Flynn was forced to write the letter of resignation under a certain amount of pressure," Leonid Slutsky,
head of the lower house of parliament's foreign affairs committee, was quoted as saying by the RIA news agency.
Flynn was a strong advocate for the need for softer foreign policy toward Russia and his departure could slow Trump's pledge
to improve relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"The target was Russia-U.S. relations, undermining confidence in the new U.S. administration," Slutsky said, without specifying
who he thought was responsible. (MORE)
With all respect, I think the Saker blogger had been little too much in his optimism for late few months. Trump is not gone tonight,
but was gone when he turned his words, in admitting "Russians were meddling with the election" right after the brief conference
of intelligence agency.
That was the very moment he surrendered. Not tonight. I was giving up on him since then. Lately he did associate with our awful
dictator Shinzo Abe, why? As long as he's "asked", not by Abe, but by the people who can tell what to do to Trump.
Quite opposing view to Saker at UNZ by Philip Giraldi (Article: Two Uninspiring Choices
). He thinks of Flynn rather differently. He says that "Michael Flynn the National Security Advisor and Nikki Haley as U.N.
Ambassador unfortunately did manage to squeak through and will presumably be well placed to wreak havoc over the next four years".
Also the same day Elliott Abrams, the certified neocon is dismissed. This tells a lot. I tend to lean towards P.Giraldi. IMO it
is NOT a "huge" victory for the neocon cabal but may be quite the contrary.
Yes, I agree. It is sometimes necessary to see the persons who have said they will support your policies in action. Not only shall
I await further developments on the political scene, but also further analysis from Saker. He's not above correcting his assumptions
when and if that is needed, and this sudden techtonic shift in the powers that be does need further analysis. The press is rushing
to interpret it one way, which has me very leery of theirs. Not for the first time.
Good thing too. Trump is a efin' disaster. I despise a possible president Pence, but to have someone stable at the US rudder would
make me feel just a bit better. Trump is a train wreck running through more and more houses. People think they can control him,
but they can't. He wants to be in control, or look like he is, even though he has no idea of what he is doing. You can explain
stuff to him, but he won't listen or just doesn't understand. He's no genious, not even a business one. He is heading for tragedy.
I think Flynn was a Trojan horse planted by the neocons himself. His history shows a career full of anti-Iran sentiment and
an excessive push for a harsher approach toward that country, I can't seem to see why his removal is necessarily a bad thing
Saker, I am afraid that the only way anything will change is if the PEOPLE rise up and DEMAND change, possibly in a not entirely
We cannot expect change from within the USG. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Trump is not powerful enough, he is no Putin or even a Kennedy.
He is clueless and the only reason he rose to power was because he wasn't Hillary.
Trump can still be worked with. But someone on "OUR" team must get an in with his administration.
It is the PEOPLE who must stand and demand change, demand an end to the Neocon infestation, demand an end to Imperialism, and
demand an end to all regime change wars. It is the people who must demand that all those who Betrayed Humanity in their disgusting
quest for power and self-aggrandizement be Punished for their crimes.
Do not worry. We will find a way to make it happen. And do not forget – You play a very important role in this process. Maybe
you will find that one day, it was kind of like a self fulfilling prophesy.
You are premature. It will all depend on who Trump replaces him with.
In fact Flynn had already blundered by blaming Iran for attacking a US war ship, which they didn't and called Iran the world's
biggest terror sponsor when it is Saudi Arabia. Flynn could have become a liability eventually and better for him to go now rather
than later and I heard ex-CIA guy Philip Giraldi talk about this in this interesting read. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/iran-hawks-take-the-white-house/
Once again I'll state the biggest mistake here was Putin's. Instead of ignoring the mountain of demonising press against Russia
and Putin during the election of Trump, Putin allowed it to get to him, and he backed away in the aftermath of Trump's election
to 'prove' Trump was his own man.
But Putin's decision created a vacuum (which was the entire idea behind the propaganda attacks), which Deep State agents all
around Trump immediately filled. Putin should have moved heaven and Earth to craft a ***day one*** alliance to "fight ISIS to
destruction". Yes I know this would have been just PR nonsense, but that was all Trump had asked for daily on his election trail.
With a guy like Trump, you race toward him, grasp him firmly by the hand, and promise him whatever he wants to hear. Putin did
not do this.
Now Putin's chance is dead. Trump is actually being successfully coerced to do and say anti-Russian stuff now. Nothing major,
butenough to kill any hope to Trump working with Russia. And worse, the instinct in Trump to put Humanity's greatest killing machine
to immediate use is being successfully exploited.
We know Iran is the real target- not bluster over North Korea. But the bluster sets a tone that "rogue states" should not be
allowed to advance their systems of self-defense. And that, of course, is the consistant cry of America against Iran. And for
those of you who claim Iran is too 'sneaky' and 'wily' to give the USA an 'excuse'- well sorry you are really clueless as to how
this game is played.
Let me explain. Saddam after Gulf War 1 got down on his knees and begged the Americans to be allowed to offer them whatever
they wanted in exchange for resurrecting the alliance America had with Iraq before the 'invasion' of Kuwait. His supply of oil
to the USA would have been an economic boon beyond belief, so he did not get what the actual issue was. But we now know. Even
tho Iraq was the idea Empire slave state, there were bigger plans in motion. The ***secular*** sunni state had to be destroyed
so the skilled civilised sunnis of Iraq could be turned into slaves of the depraved wahhabi state of Saudi Arabia, and made the
commanders of SA's new extremist terror hoardes- butchers that we currently know as ISIS.
Saddam couldn't imagine in a million years that his masters in the West wanted to Middle East to burn and fall to 'sunni' (actually
wahhabi) extremist savages. After all the Deep State project, since the 19th century when Britain helped the Turkish Empire to
fade away, was to encourage ***secular*** civilised Islamic rule. And those rulers of islamic heritage wanted to be as civilised
as their brothers in the West- they didn't want to hark back to medieval values or encourage their people to do the same. Saddam
didn't know that Tony Blair and the other demons had ripped up the rule book- and were determined to create hell on Earth within
PNAC made it clear that the 9/11 false flag would be the road to Iran's ending. History shows their plans slipped- especially
since the invaion of Iraq had no possible excuse, creating waves of revulsion amongst the general sheeple that became an anti-war
sentiment. Obama was 'accidently' elected over Clinton slowing things down even more, and leading to the acceleration of the wahhabi
terror play. Libya was taken out almost pointlessly (because Libya isn't a good source of ISIS cannon fodder) simply because old
animosity between the USA and Libya made it too much of a testing ground for the latter use of the same animosity between Iran
and the USA.
For most Americans- Trump above all- Libya was the 'little brother' of Iran, and now the USA has finally 'beaten up' Libya,
well it is 'obvious' it is time for Iran to go down as well.
There is but one issue now. Those Deep State demons that really run the USA have a level of power players beneath them that
mostly think attacking Iran is the stupidest move possible. They can now jerk Trump around like a perfect puppet, but anyone Trump
tries to use to put together the Iran war plan will hit long standing, well argued resistance. For conventional right-wing hard
men, Iran is all lose and no gain. Sure, the racist psychopaths that frequently rule the zionist terror state of Israel are all
for war with Iran, but this very fact is used as evidence that such a war would be utterly moronic by the right-wing thinkers
of the USA.
Iran is the immovable object, but the demons are the irresistable force. And Iran only has to make one fatal slip- without
even knowing it ***is*** a slip before successful demonising anti-Iranian propaganda takes hold. Of course, the BBC and every
other zionist outlet has already tried attacking Iran every which way without success so far, but successful propaganda is as
'trendy' as a pop hit so you never know when a particular mud ball will stick.
We have a sense of this with the foul Soros HRW attack against Syria today, stating that "Syria used chemical weapons to take
Allepo". The Israeli controlled French government immediately demanded UN action against Assad. Of course, the demon play in Syria
is done, but anti-Syrian rhetoric is just practise for Iran.
HRW is Soros and the US State Dept. Amnesty International is MI6. Neither is now trusted to the slightest degree by the informed,
but the actions of both show current thinking and strategy of the Deep State.
Having lost Trump,Putin must now act ***immediately*** to save Iran. Giving weapons to Iran cannot do this. Having a public
formal alliaince, with Russians working on the ground in Iran can. Of course the religious leaders who rule Iran distrust Russia,
and Putin must do everything he can to point out that it is Russia protection or utter destruction for Iran- and to bluntly state
the ***truth** – which is if the West does attack Iran, Russia will back off and leave Iran to its fate. It is prevention or disaster,
"The resignation of the US President's National Security Adviser Michael Flynn won't affect Russian-American relations because
they are not shaped yet and there is, in fact, nothing to have an impact on," Fyodor Lukyanov told Sputnik.
The political analyst further explained that it still remains unclear whether Donald Trump wanted to reset the relations with
Russia with the help of either Michael Flynn or new Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. However, he again reiterated that it is
impossible to have an impact on something that does not yet exist.
The expert explained that the attacks on Trump's National Security Adviser for his alleged pro-Russian position were "something
made out of thin air." However he had to resign because he was not careful enough.
He further noted that there are still chaotic developments in the Trump administration and there might be more resignations
Kucinich: "Be VERY careful. That's my warning this morning. WAKE UP AMERICA "
"This isn't about whether you're for or against Donald Trump. Hello! This is about whether the American people are bystanders
in a power play inside the intelligence community . and whether we can be forced to go to war with any country. ,,,, A game is
being played with the security of our country. I [Dennis Kucinich] don't often share the interviews I do, but ask that you watch
and share this one because it's important.
What I don't understand is this. We see and read of the power exerted by the liberal/neocon "deep state" and their abilities
to disrupt and damage Trump's presidency. But in order to get where he has gotten to today, Trump must have some powerful backers
too. So where are these powerful Trump supporters and what are they doing if anything?
Saker, as you know very well my warnings that Flynn was the keystone, the means through which reform could come to IC, MIC, Deep
State-the wombs of Khazarian Russophobia and Hegemony-I agree with you completely that your analysis is correct. It is over.
Trump will not be able to control Pompeo or Mattis.
Trump will not be able to penetrate the Deep State and uproot the warmongers.
Trump will not be able to end the Hegemony.
What he presented as stiff opening arguments against Iran and Russia are now weaponized with his signature on them. Ukraine
will be on some budget line and kept viable. Syria will be a target again per Wolfowitz-Perle and Bibi.
Where ceasefire and peace was possible we will get more war and chaos.
ISIS will not be defeated anywhere soon. Russia will be forced to supply regular troops soon if it intends to clean out ISIS
and al Nusra while it can. Or it will be bogged down (US goal for certain.)
Now, for what we must do: keep exposing the tools and persons who removed Flynn.
This was all at the surface of the Deep State. Most of the players were visible. No subtle, covert operation this assassination.
And from that careful documentation we can keep "outing" the enemy within.
Trump, sadly, may have bought a one-term Presidency when he let this become a neocon issue.
His daughter and son-in-law tamping down his instincts to fight have been a huge disservice.
Bannon, a hegemonic ideologue in foreign policy, certainly would not protect Flynn. Bannon served the Naval Intel world in his
career, and nothing good has ever come out of US Naval Intel. They plotted against their own man, JFK.
We, have, a hard choice. Despair and gnash our teeth, or continue to expose the evil operators inside the US government. Spare
the Trump-bashing. He erred hugely. But it was predictable. Flynn was a wild card warrior. He was fearless and reckless in behalf
of his mission. Trump sent him to the Russians. They had to know the outcome would be intense heat.
But what was unknown, the treachery in the inner circle. Pence is fully exposed now. Trump knows this clearly. He can't share
that with anyone. His circle is filled with like-minded who would serve Pence more comfortably than Trump himself.
Pence is Brutus. Watch him as he goes to the Munich meeting. He is pure Neo-Con and a treacherous liar himself.
No greater threat exists to Peace than a traitor to the nation and the opportunity for Detente being thrown away.
Trump failed to protect his warrior. But the Intel agencies were withholding approvals of deputies' clearances. They had denied
Robin Townley, deputy for Africa a clearance for NSC. This signaled that they would undermine Flynn and Trump every day like the
Dems have with the nominations and street riots. It was all Trump could do to try to get control of things. Messaging was scrambled,
forward movement was stalled. He had to jettison Flynn. But it was all on him. He didn't control Pence and marginalize him. He
faced Pence and blinked.
Sad. Maybe Tragic. But, Trump has comeback potential. It just won't be with the Intel Community.
He has to find leverage from elsewhere. Probably, why he's talking to Chris Christie. I suspect DOJ and Sessions is one weapon.
Maybe they will bring Christie in to DOJ, if he has a huge role, and use him to prosecute the leakers in Deep State. It's only
Listen to Pence, watch Mattis. And know that Pompeo is more of the same in CIA.
Also, Kelly in DHS is weak and a go-along general. He'll test the wind.
What has happened is Trump thought he had built a citadel using Flynn and the generals around him, with Mattis and Kelly. It
has all been turned into a prison, and Trump is hostage.
Ahh an article on demonology at the Duran. (Check out pictures of Abrams - clearly a creature from the netherworld.)
Demons, vampires, goblins and orcs, the occasional ogre.
Some crazies are made to live in the attic, while these prefer the basement and other underground abodes.
About the same gang as always.
(I see dead people. They are everywhere. They walk around like everyone else. They don't even know they are dead. - The living
dead - all psychopaths, surviving on human blood, so to speak.)
When Trump started loading up his cabinet with these ghouls and their associates or rivals it became obvious where it was going.
As I said once before, the doctrine that states have no friends but rather interests this was saying the state is run by psychopaths,
as that is precisely the mind set of psychopaths, individually or collectively.
If one follows the logic that the globalist cabal touting the female was bent to attack Russia in early 2017, then the Trump election
may has interrupted the schedule, but not, evidently, the plan, the war-plan, itself. They never gave up power
The implication is that the war was scheduled, and still is.
Repeat. The implication is that the march to war is ongoing and deliberate.
Well Saker, I'm going contrarian, which does not necessarily mean 180 degrees. I viewed Flynn's appointment as plus/negative,
positive re Russia, negative re Iran. It's still potentially positive re Russia as Tillerson is still in. To write off Trump so
early in his Presidency is really not very helpful, considering the monumental task he has of taking on the very corrupt establishment,
did you think there would be no blowback? Also, clearly Trump is inexperienced politically and doesn't know all the ins and outs
of the political establishment in DC, so has to find his feet.
A big plus is that we have moved away from warfare and potentially a nuclear holocaust – if anybody thinks that mere radioactive
fallout from exploding warheads is survivable hasn't taken into account something which is far more deadly, how about many more
nuclear power reactor failures like Fukushima, or worse?
Another point which has been overlooked is that he got rid of nuland – or at least she couldn't work under him – either way
I see that as major (personally) together with the much less hostile if not almost indifference to the Donbass, with kiev in turmoil.
It was reported that a US warship won't now visit Odessa – small but unmistakeable changes happening.
There is an old saying; "When you're up to your ass in alligators it's easy to forget your original intention was to drain the
The single greatest lesson I learned in a decade of trying (and failing) to change national policy is that success is measured
in inches, not miles. Bureaucratic inertia is a highly under-rated force in its own right. Real change can only be generational.
Unless and until there is a "b" team of keenly aware and circumspect underlings who see the problems and understand the patience
required to make incremental change, there will be no meaningful change.
Success isn't home runs (although most who desire positive change would welcome the odd one). Real success is bases-on-balls,
running out infield hits and bloop singles and advancing runners.
Trump must remember business 101 under-promise and over-deliver. If he wants to keep the tens of millions who voted for him
engaged and positive he must deliver on small promises. I am dismayed that so many here see the "beginning of the end" instead
of "the end of the beginning".
Flynn (more than most) knew the rules going in and he blew it. His sins are sins of over-reach and forgetting the basics of
protocol. His sacrifice will encourage others to step up. The dream of untangling the web is not dead. Too many millions (arguably
billions) demand meaningful, positive change those who have faith understand it will be a slow and sometimes painful process.
Real success is bases-on-balls, running out infield hits and bloop singles and advancing runners.
@Simon Wagstaff -
Allow me a moment of comedic relief in this tragic drama ?
This is true as a general principle. But somebody PLEASE get through to Clint Hurdle (Pittsburgh Pirates Manager) that wasting
outs by bunting runners from first to second predictably results in them being stranded at third.
Small advances are potentially valuable, but when you run out of outs to achieve them they were mistakes.
if there is any reason to save the Trump presidency, Pence needs to be isolated asap – w/removal of all Republican loyalists within
WH including Priebus. More to come re Pence role on how this all unfolded. All politics is smoke and mirrors ie cabinet appointees
– watch what we do; not what we say. Tillerson and Sessions esp forced to grovel by R's and Dems –
One benefit to all this has been public revelation of Dems as partners with the Deep State parties. The true depth of their
betrayal to the country is now undeniable as we already knew R's could not be trusted. ie payback coming re Lizzie Warren's vitriol
on Sessions. her poll numbers for 2018 election not looking good.
Cynthia – if those suggested names are viable, keep to yourself so as to avoid public exposure at this point perhaps best messenger
may be Ivanka
The entirety of tRump's foreign policy doesn't revolve around Flynn's status. Has tRump decided to reinstate the TTP and TTIP
as "trade" policy goals? Decided to not renegotiate/pull out of NAFTA and other so-called trade pacts? Pull back/reconsolidate
the Empire of Bases? Attempt to totally disrupt China's OBOR or Russia's EEU through the use of terrorist proxies as HRC's Neocons
planned? Then there's Flynn's illogical hatred of Iran and the complications that posed for reestablishing cordial relations with
Russia. And those points are just a few of many.
IMO, Saker and other commentators have reacted in knee-jerk fashion to Flynn's resignation, for he didn't represent the be-all/end-all
of tRump's foreign policy agenda. I'm far more disturbed by many of tRump's cabinet choices plus the fact that they were confirmed
despite their lies and criminal actions, which is what's provoked most of the resistance to the current national government–congress
Trump has no party behind him. And he is no FDR to hit establishment with the full force of Federal
"... This not about "how easy to convict Trump". This is about who is the real boss in Washington, DC. ..."
"... Today's Neocon victory might well as huge event as Trump victory. Now it is Trump defeat. I think it's over for Trump... He did not last long, did he ? From now on he might well be just "yet another puppet". Much like Obama, or Bush II, or Clinton. ..."
"... Neocons are celebrating. That's for sure. Deep state is way too strong and "Trump rebellion", if such existed, in now squashed with the help of big guns of NYT, Wapo and Bloomberg charged with good old "compromat". ..."
"Flynn's the First Casualty of Trump's Unsustainable Disinformation Campaign"
'In this White House, honesty is not the best policy but one to be considered among other possibilities"
by Margaret Carlson...02.14.17...2:06 PM ET
"General Michael Flynn didn't resign Monday night because he lied about his calls with the
Russian ambassador and was vulnerable to blackmail. He resigned because the public found out about
the lie and keeping him, at long last, became "unsustainable" for the Trump administration.
Just a few hours earlier, it was sustainable. White House counselor Kellyanne Conway said so.
The president, she said Monday afternoon, had "full confidence" in Flynn. Another White House
official confirmed this to Washington Post reporter Philip Rucker who reported, also on Monday,
that Trump, knowing what he knew, wasn't going to decide about Flynn for a few more days.
What changed? Throw out the old saw it's the cover-up that gets you. The White House ceded
Tuesday that it knew about the cover-up for weeks. It's the dribbling out of the details of Flynn's
mission to coddle Russia-in keeping with Trump's policy-that presented a clear and present danger
that could only be staunched if Flynn were let go.
But they want us to believe it was about the lying. At his daily briefing Tuesday, Sean Spicer
said it was "plain and simple a matter of trust." But in this whole mess, lying is a lesser included
offense, one which this White House is particularly unsuited to cast stones at. Honesty is not
the best policy there but one to be considered among other possibilities.
There would have been no resignation if what Flynn said in the taped calls, and White House
knowledge of it, hadn't been exposed late Monday in a Washington Post piece. The White House counsel-and
likely others in the Administration-had been told by then Acting Attorney General Sally Yates
that Flynn had actually made multiple calls, during the transition and going back to the campaign,
to the ambassador of a sworn adversary of the United States. Flynn's message to the ambassador
was that President Vladimir Putin might want to hold off on retaliating for sanctions imposed
by then President Barack Obama for hacking the U.S. elections. It wouldn't be that bad under the
Yates' information was reportedly weeks late getting to the White House because FBI Director
James Comey, who seems to be everywhere these days, asked her to hold off because of his ongoing
investigation into contacts between Trump associates and Russia. But after they'd been told, Spicer
put out the opposite of what the Justice Department knew to be true: that Flynn had discussed
Christmas greetings, among other things, not sanctions in his calls. With that disinformation
(Spicer likely didn't know the truth), Comey's request fell by the wayside and Yates, since fired
by Trump for not backing him up on his travel ban but perhaps for this, proceeded to inform Trump
White House counsel Donald McGahn. (McGhan, Spicer said Tuesday, immediately informed Trump.)
Whatever Flynn said, we know Putin took his outreach to heart and let the sanctions pass virtually
unnoticed. Since the calls, we might ask who has done more to coddle Russia, Flynn or the president.
Trump has kept praising Putin to the point of accusing the country he now leads of killing its
own people as Putin has done to his internal enemies. The two countries, in Trump's telling, are
To the excuses for why Flynn was let go, add "leaks" which Trump blamed in a tweet for all
that's wrong in Washington.
On TV, Trump surrogates including former military officer Carl Higbee, who's been interviewed
for a high level White House job, have dressed up the resignation in the usual nothing's-been-proven
talk about how Flynn had become a "distraction" and that this is a "rough town for good people."
Actually, that's true but not the case here as few people not on Trump's payroll thought Flynn
was the right choice.
The only reason Flynn got appointed to the most sensitive job in the Administration is that
he is a crony of Trump who stuck by him during the campaign and who could be trusted to do his
bidding without asking too many questions. If National Security Adviser were a post that required
Senate confirmation, Republicans, who have acquiesced to about everything else, would have balked.
By a margin even wider than those who dare to question the month-old presidency-that is Republican
Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Jeff Flake-Flynn wouldn't have made it.
With Flynn's ouster, the Wall Trump was actually been able to build around himself may crumble.
Until now calls for an independent investigation into the Russian hacking have been rejected.
Now, that investigation is likely to proceed, along with McCain's effort to codify Russian sanctions.
Speaker Paul Ryan may eventually grow a spine. Amid a running joke at his Tuesday press conference
wishing wives of the leadership a Happy Valentine's Day, Ryan was pinned down to admitting Flynn
was rightly let go. Look for the heat to be turned up on the inquiry into the ties between Russia
and Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort.
Just maybe there may be less flagrant lying now from this administration. This last weekend,
Trump's anointed wunderkind Stephen Miller was sent out on his first Sunday morning talk show
appearances. He regurgitated Trump's insistence that there's rampant voter fraud in the country
and a costly investigation should ensue. Miller brought up the fact-free claim that hordes of
Massachusetts voters drove to New Hampshire to cast illegal ballots in November. Fresh denunciations
of that claim came afterwards from former New Hampshire GOP chair Fergus Cullen and from current
New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu, a scion of the multigeneration Republican loyalists, who
said it was false. Don't think Miller was freelancing.
The only praise for Miller came from Trump himself who lavished him with it. In this White
House, lying is not a firing offense.
Trump is having a hard time in his public effort to replace Spicer and perhaps his chief of
staff in an effort to fine one single person with the experience and maturity to mind the store.
That looks easy compared to replacing Flynn. Trump has made it clear he won't hire anyone who's
criticized him. In filling the open national security adviser position, that leaves almost no
"How easy to convict Trump and his while HRC was always innocent and picked upon....."
This not about "how easy to convict Trump". This is about who is the real boss in
Today's Neocon victory might well as huge event as Trump victory. Now it is Trump defeat. I
think it's over for Trump... He did not last long, did he ? From now on he might well be just
"yet another puppet". Much like Obama, or Bush II, or Clinton.
There was a dream that with the election of Trump neocons will be booted from Washington, DC
by peaceful means via electoral mechanisms or at least their influence will be cut. It was a high
time to do this clean up, anyway. They outlived their usefulness long ago (if they were useful
ever). This dream now is probably over. Wolfowitz, Perle, Ledeen, Robert Kagan and Co are back.
For nationalists and "nationally oriented part of US capitalists" now the choice is very difficult.
libezkova -> im1dc...
Neocons are celebrating. That's for sure. Deep state is way too strong and "Trump rebellion",
if such existed, in now squashed with the help of big guns of NYT, Wapo and Bloomberg charged
with good old "compromat".
After losing Flint Trump is done.
The problem that Trump is facing is that now he does not have any viable support to counterbalance
neocon dominated faction of intelligence services.
Essentially Trump task was impossible from the very beginning. Most of the Washington DC neocon
nests needed to be cleaned. And that is much more difficult than Hercules clean up of the Augean
Hercules knew this job would mean getting dirty and smelly, but sometimes even a hero has to
do these things. Then Eurystheus made Hercules' task even harder: he had to clean up after the
cattle of Augeas in a single day.
Now King Augeas owned more cattle than anyone in Greece. Some say that he was a son of one
of the great gods, and others that he was a son of a mortal; whosever son he was, Augeas was very
rich, and he had many herds of cows, bulls, goats, sheep and horses.
... ... ...
Despite being widely attributed as a Chinese curse, there is no equivalent expression in Chinese.
The nearest related Chinese expression is "寧為太平犬，莫做亂離人" (nìng wéi tàipíng quǎn, mò zuò luàn lí
rén), which is usually translated as "Better to be a dog in a peaceful time, than to be a human
in a chaotic (warring) period."
"May you live in interesting times" is an English expression purporting to be a translation of
a traditional Chinese curse. Despite being so common in English as to be known as "the Chinese
curse", the saying is apocryphal and no actual Chinese source has ever been produced. ...
Evidence that the phrase was in use as early as 1936 is provided in a memoir written by Hughe
Knatchbull-Hugessen, the British Ambassador to China in 1936 and 1937, and published in 1949.
He mentions that before he left England for China in 1936 a friend told him of a Chinese curse,
"May you live in interesting times". ...
When Trump gets the peace prize and talks about starting wars to stop unjust peace and nation
build with no success.....
Flynn's sin was inferring to the Russian ambassador that senselessly pushing Russia into a
corner for Vicky Nuland might end.
Why the Russians are doing the new GLCMs is perfectly reasonable from their perspective. It is called looking out for your country, which US is doing with blood all over but US is
the exceptional shining city on the hill.
And if Trump is a war criminal W. and Obama better look out for the Haig coming after them.
isn't impressed with Trump's national security appointments so far. Here he comments on Flynn's
Iran is another subject on which Flynn displays far more simplistically expressed emotion than
any careful attention to facts and the pros and cons of U.S. policy options. His attitude is demonstrated
Congressional testimony in June 2015, which can be fairly summarized as saying that Iran is
bad in every respect and we should have no dealings with it on anything. (Jim Lobe
collated some of the lowlights from this statement). Flynn stated that "regime change in Tehran
is the best way to stop the Iranian nuclear weapons program"-with no further elaboration on how
this would be brought about, leaving us to suppose that it is the Iraq 2003 model. He has given
no indication since then of dropping his blanket opposition to the negotiated agreement that limits
Iran's nuclear program and has successfully been in operation for more than a year, nor does he
show any awareness of the U.S. intelligence community's public judgment that Iran had stopped
any nuclear weapons program several years before he was testifying.
Among other things, Flynn claims to know that "Iran has every intention of building a nuclear
weapon" despite the fact that their government abandoned any attempt to do so over a decade ago.
He claims that Iran's government has stated this intention "many times," but the truth is that their
government has consistently denied ever seeking to build such a weapon. Many of the things that Flynn
asserts in his testimony are demonstrably untrue, but they are part of a pattern of consistently
exaggerating the threat from Iran and ignoring evidence that contradicts his alarmist assessments.
Later in his testimony, he says this about Iran's relations with certain other states:
Just look at the cooperation with North Korea, China and Russia. Connect those dots, and you
get the outline of a global alliance aimed at the U.S., our friends, and our allies.
This is not a case of "connecting dots" at all. It is an invention of an "alliance" where none
exists on the basis of some very weak evidence. There is some limited cooperation between these states,
but they are not allies nor do they regularly work together as if they were. We see in Flynn's testimony
a nod towards the imaginary global "alliance" that Flynn and Ledeen concoct in their book (here is
video of the co-authors talking about the book from earlier this year), so this is a view that
he already held over a year ago. That brings me back to the conclusion I
reached over the summer when I first started writing about Flynn:
The fact that he believes (or claims to believe) things as obviously false global "alliance"
of villains should make it clear that he is happy to indulge and recycle extremely dangerous and
foolish ideological talking points. That's not someone any of us should want working in or advising
a future administration.
Unfortunately, he will be advising the next president in a very influential position, and we should
have no illusions about the quality of advice Flynn will be giving him.
But as an investigation published by Truthout in 2011
revealed , the target list that JSOC used for its "night raids" and other operations to kill
supposed Taliban was based on a fundamentally flawed methodology that was inherently incapable of
distinguishing between Taliban insurgents and civilians who had only tangential contacts with the
Taliban organization. And it was Flynn who devised that methodology.
The "night raids" on Afghan homes based on Flynn's methodology caused so much Afghan anger toward
Americans that Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, acknowledged the problem
of Afghan antagonism toward the entire program publicly in a March 2010 directive.
The system that led to that Afghan outrage began to take shape in Iraq in 2006, when Flynn, then-intelligence
chief for JSOC, developed a new methodology for identifying and locating al-Qaeda and Shia Mahdi
Army members in Iraq. Flynn revealed the technologies used in Iraq in an
unclassified article published in 2008.
At the center of the system was what Flynn called the "Unblinking Eye," referring to 24-hour drone
surveillance of specific locations associated with "known and suspected terrorist sites and individuals."
The drone surveillance was then used to establish a "pattern of life analysis," which was the main
tool used to determine whether to strike the target. We now know from reports of drone strikes in
Pakistan that killed entire groups of innocent people that "pattern of life analysis" is frequently
a matter of guesswork that is completely wrong.
Flynn's unclassified article also revealed that "SIGINT" (signals intelligence), i.e., the monitoring
of cell phone metadata, and "geo-location" of phones were the other two major tools used in Flynn's
system of targeting military strikes. JSOC was using links among cell phones to identify suspected
Flynn's article suggested that the main emphasis in intelligence for targeting in Iraq was on
providing analysis of the aerial surveillance visual intelligence on a target to help decide in real
time whether to carry out a strike on it.
But when McChrystal took command of US forces in Afghanistan in mid-2009 and took Flynn with him
as his intelligence chief, Flynn's targeting methodology changed dramatically. JSOC had already begun
to carry out "night raids" in Afghanistan -- usually attacks on private homes in the middle of the
night -- and McChrystal wanted to increase the tempo of those raids. The number of night raids
increased from 20 per month in May 2009 to 90 per month six months later. It reached an average
more than 100 a month in the second half of 2009 and the first half of 2010.
At this point, the targets were no longer Taliban commanders and higher-ups in the organization.
They included people allegedly doing basic functions such as logistics, bomb-making and propaganda.
In order to rapidly build up the highly secret "kill/capture" list (called the "Joint Prioritized
Effects List," or JPEL) to meet McChrystal's demands for more targets, Flynn used a technique called
"link analysis." This technique involved the use of software that allowed intelligence analysts to
see the raw data from drone surveillance and cell phone data transformed instantly into a "map" of
the insurgent "network." That "map" of each network associated with surveillance of a location became
the basis for adding new names to the JPEL.
Flynn could increase the number of individual "nodes" on that map by constantly adding more cell
phone metadata for the computer-generated "map" of the insurgency. Every time JSOC commandos killed
or captured someone, they took their cell phones to add their metadata to the database. And US intelligence
also gathered cell phone data from the population of roughly 3,300 suspected insurgents being held
in the Afghan prison system, who were allowed to use mobile phones freely in their cells.
What the expansion of cell phone data surveillance meant was that an ever-greater proportion of
the targets on Flynn's "kill/capture list" were not identified at all, except as mobile phone numbers.
As Matthew Hoh, who served as the senior US civilian official in Zabul Province until he quit in
protest in September 2009, explained to me, "When you are relying on cell phones for intelligence,
you don't get the names of those targeted."
There was no requirement for any effort to establish the actual identity of the targets listed
as cell phone numbers in order to guard against mistakes.
What made Flynn's methodology for expanding the kill/capture list even riskier was that there
was no requirement for any effort to establish the actual identity of the targets listed as cell
phone numbers in order to guard against mistakes.
Using such a methodology in the Afghan socio-political context guaranteed that a high proportion
of those on the kill/capture list were innocent civilians. As former deputy to the European Union
special representative to Afghanistan Michael Semple (one of the few genuine experts in the world
on the Taliban movement) explained to me, most Afghans in the Pashtun south and east of Afghanistan
"have a few Taliban commander numbers saved to their mobile phone contacts" as a "survival mechanism."
Nader Nadery, a commissioner of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission in 2010, estimated
that the total civilian deaths for all 73 night raids about which the commission had complaints that
year was 420. But the commission acknowledged that it didn't have access to most of the districts
dominated by the Taliban. So the actual civilian toll may well have been many times that number --
meaning that civilians may have accounted for more than half of the 2,000 alleged "Taliban" killed
in JSOC's operations in 2010.
The percentage of innocent people among those who were captured and incarcerated was even higher.
In December 2010, the US command in Afghanistan leaked to a friendly blogger that 4,100 "Taliban"
had been captured in the previous six months. But an unclassified February 5, 2011, internal document
of the Combined Joint Inter-Agency Task Force responsible for detention policy in Afghanistan, which
I obtained later in 2011, showed that only 690 Afghans were admitted to the US detention facility
at Parwan during that six-month period. Twenty percent of those were later released upon review of
their files. So alleged evidence of participation in the Taliban insurgency could not have existed
for more than 552 people at most, or 14 percent of the total number said to have been captured. But
many of those 552 were undoubtedly innocent as well.
9 hours ago
Porter is either a paid CIA/dimocrat party shill or perhaps extraordinarily stupid.
It was OBAMA who implemented the vaunted 'surge" and flooded Afghanistan with an extra 30,000
US mercenaries. And I believe that obama was the US leader in 2009. To whine about a 3 star general,
under orders to carry out an obama policy and then blame Trump by association reminds one of a
3 year old trying to make sense of Kabuki....surreal or simply delusional?
We see that america needs a police state oligarchy; americans cannot distinguish between bovine
excreta and caviar.
And so did the American people by sitting in the passive bubble of patriotism while we continue
to scorch the Earth with imperialism abroad while having a surveillance state at home. We are
I don't know why we are there or in Iraq. It was the Saudi families and Saudi funding that created
the terrorism of 9-11. It was the Bush Admin NeoCons and the Neoliberal philosopy that created
the longest war in our history. It is entirely coincidental that this war like Vietnam inflicts
its greatest toll on a bunch of impoverished villagers.
"... Former associates complain of Flynn's political tunnel vision that could wreak havoc in the Middle East. His consulting company, the Flynn Intel Group, appears to lobby for the Turkish government and Flynn recently wrote an article calling for all-out US support for Turkey, who Washington has been trying to stop launching a full scale invasion of Syria and Iraq. ..."
Flynn notoriously sees Islamic militancy not only as a danger, but as an existential threat to
the US. He tweeted earlier this year that "fear of Muslims is RATIONAL".
There is an obsessive, self-righteous quality to Flynn's approach that led him to join chants
of "lock her up" in reference to Hillary Clinton during election rallies. Former associates complain
of Flynn's political tunnel vision that could wreak havoc in the Middle East. His consulting company,
the Flynn Intel Group, appears to lobby for the Turkish government and Flynn recently wrote an article
calling for all-out US support for Turkey, who Washington has been trying to stop launching a full
scale invasion of Syria and Iraq. Unsurprisingly, the Turkish president welcomed Trump's election
with enthusiasm and sharply criticised protests against it in the US (something that would be swiftly
dealt with by police water cannon in Turkey).
A striking feature of the aspirants for senior office under Trump is a level of personal greed
high even by the usual standards of Washington. Trump famously campaigned under the slogan "Drain
the Swamp" and castigated official corruption, but it is turning out that the outflow pipe from swamp
is the entry point of the new administration.
Michael Flynn, expected to advise Donald Trump on counterproductive killing operations misleading
labeled "national security," is generally depicted as a lawless
torturer and assassin. But, whether for partisan reasons or otherwise, he's a lawless torturer
and assassin who has blurted out some truths he shouldn't be allowed to forget.
"Lt. Gen. Flynn, who since leaving the DIA has become an outspoken critic of the Obama administration,
charges that the White House relies heavily on drone strikes for reasons of expediency, rather
than effectiveness. 'We've tended to say, drop another bomb via a drone and put out a headline
that "we killed Abu Bag of Doughnuts" and it makes us all feel good for 24 hours,' Flynn said.
'And you know what? It doesn't matter. It just made them a martyr, it just created a new reason
to fight us even harder.'"
"When you drop a bomb from a drone you are going to cause more damage than you are going to
cause good. The more weapons we give, the more bombs we drop, that just fuels the conflict."
Will Flynn then advise Trump to cease dropping bombs from drones? Or will he go ahead and advise
drone murders, knowing full well that this is counterproductive from the point of view of anyone
other than war profiteers?
From the same report:
"Asked . . . if drone strikes tend to create more terrorists than they kill, Flynn . . . replied:
'I don't disagree with that,' adding: 'I think as an overarching strategy, it is a failed strategy.'"
So Trump's almost inevitable string of drone murders will be conducted under the guidance of a
man who knows they produce terrorism rather than reducing it, that they endanger the United States
rather than protecting it. In that assessment, he agrees with the vast majority of Americans who
believe that the wars of the past
15 years have made the United States less safe, which is the view of numerous other
experts as well.
Flynn, too, expanded his comments from drones to the wars as a whole:
"What we have is this continued investment in conflict. The more weapons we give, the more
bombs we drop, that just fuels the conflict. Some of that has to be done but I am looking for
the other solutions."
Flynn also, like Trump, accurately cites the criminal 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq as critical to
the creation of ISIS:
"Commenting on the rise of ISIL in Iraq, Flynn acknowledged the role played by the US invasion
and occupation of Iraq. 'We definitely put fuel on a fire,' he told Hasan. 'Absolutely there
is no doubt, history will not be kind to the decisions that were made certainly in 2003. Going
into Iraq, definitely it was a strategic mistake."
So there will be no advice to make similar strategic mistakes that are highly profitable to the
Flynn, despite perhaps being a leading advocate of lawless imprisonment and torture, also admits
to the counterproductive nature of those crimes:
"The former lieutenant general denied any involvement in the litany of abuses carried out by
JSOC interrogators at Camp Nama in Iraq, as revealed by the
New York Times and
Human Rights Watch, but admitted the US prison system in Iraq in the post-war period 'absolutely'
helped radicalise Iraqis who later joined Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) and its successor organisation,
Recently the International Criminal Court teased the world with the news that it might possible
consider indicting US and other war criminals for their actions in Afghanistan. One might expect
all-out resistance to such a proposal from Trump and his gang of hyper-nationalist war mongers, except
that . . .
"Flynn also called for greater accountability for US soldiers involved in abuses against Iraqi
detainees: 'You know I hope that as more and more information comes out that people are held accountable
History is not going to look kind on those actions and we will be held, we should be held, accountable
for many, many years to come.'"
Let's not let Flynn forget any of these words. On Syria he has blurted out some similar facts
to those Trump has also articulated:
"Publicly commenting for the first time on a previously-classified August 2012
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) memo,
which had predicted 'the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality
in Eastern Syria ( ) this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want' and confirmed
that 'the Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood, and [Al Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving
the insurgency in Syria,' the former DIA chief told Head to Head that 'the [Obama] Administration'
didn't 'listen' to these warnings issued by his agency's analysts. 'I don't know if they turned
a blind eye,' he said. 'I think it was a decision, I think it was a willful decision.'"
Let that sink in. Flynn is taking credit for having predicted that backing fighters in Syria could
lead to something like ISIS. And he's suggesting that Obama received this information and chose to
Now, here's a question: What impact will "bombing the hell" out of people have? What good will
"killing their families" do? Spreading nukes around? "Stealing their oil"? Making lists of and banning
Muslims? Is it Flynn's turn to willfully ignore key facts and common sense in order to "advise" against
his better judgment a new president who prefers to be advised to do what he was going to do anyway?
Or can Flynn be convinced to apply lessons learned at huge human cost to similar situations going
forward even with a president of a different party, race, and IQ?
"... "I think it was a decision. I think it was a willful decision," ..."
"... "the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [Al- Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria," ..."
"... "the West, Gulf countries and Turkey." ..."
"... "If the situation unravels, there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime." ..."
"... "dire consequences" ..."
"... "ISI (the Islamic State of Iraq) could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards of unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory," ..."
The US didn't interfere with the rise of anti-government jihadist groups in Syria that finally degenerated
into Islamic State, claims the former head of America's Defense Intelligence Agency, backing a secret
2012 memo predicting their rise. Trends
An interview with retired Lieutenant
General Michael Flynn, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), given to Al Jazeera's
Mehdi Hasan, confirms earlier suspicions that Washington was monitoring jihadist groups emerging
as opposition in Syria.
The classified DIA
report presented in August 2012, stated that "the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI
[Al- Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria," being supported by
"the West, Gulf countries and Turkey."
The document recently declassified through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), analyses the
situation in Syria in the summer of 2012 and predicts: "If the situation unravels, there is the
possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria and
this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian
The report warns of "dire consequences" of this scenario, because it would allow Al-Qaeda
to regain its positions in Iraq and unify the jihadist Sunni forces in Iraq, Syria and the rest of
the Sunnis in the Arab world against all other Muslim minorities they consider dissenters.
"ISI (the Islamic State of Iraq) could also declare an Islamic State through its union with
other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards of unifying
Iraq and the protection of its territory," the DIA report correctly predicted at the time.
Those groups eventually emerged as Islamic State (IS formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Al-Nusra Front, an Islamic
group loyal to Al-Qaeda.
We're at war, but few people know it... or are willing to accept it. By
SomeRandomGuy on July 17, 2016 Format: Hardcover Verified Purchase When I had heard
in the news that Lt Gen Flynn might be chosen by Donald Trump as his Vice Presidential nominee,
I was quick to do some research on Flynn and came across this work. Having worked in the intelligence
community myself in the past several years, I was intrigued to hear what the previous director
of the DIA had to say. I have read many books on the topic of Islam and I am glad I picked this
The big takeaways from this book is the (1) systemic manipulation of intelligence analysts'
conclusions to fit political narratives (I have personally seen my work modified to "soften" the
message/conclusions for x, y, or z reasons) and (2) Radical Islam is not a new phenomenon that
spawned as a response to "American imperialism" as often preached from the lecterns of western
If you have formed your opinion of Islam and the nature of the West's fight in the Middle East
on solely what you hear in the main steam media (all sides), you would do well to read this book
as a starting point into self-education on an incredibly complex topic.
There is no love lost between Lt Gen Flynn and President Obama, and Flynn's frustration
with Obama's lack of leadership is clear throughout this work. Usually this political opining
in a work such as this is distracting, but it does add much-needed context to decisions and events.
That said, Lt Gen Flynn did a great job addressing a complex topic in plain language. While this
is not a seminal work on
General Flynn is a career Army combat intelligence officer with extensive hard experience mostly
in the Middle East, a lifetime Democrat, who seems to understand and is able to clearly and concisely
define the threat of Radical Islam (NOT all Islam) far better than both the Bush ("W") and Obama
administrations politicos in Washington were willing to hear or accept. He supports what he can
tell us with citations. Radical Islam has declared war on Western democracies, most of all on
the US. Its allies include Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and others. Their war against us
is a long-term effort, and our politicians (except Trump?) don't want to hear it. We need to demand
that our politicos prepare for this assault and start taking wise, strong steps to defeat it.
Western Europe may already have been fatally infiltrated by "refugees" who will seek to Islamize
it, and current birth rates suggest that those nations will have Muslim majorities in 20 years.
General Flynn details what we must do to survive the assault. I bought the Kindle version and
began reading it, but then paid more for the audible version so that I could get through it faster.
Please buy and read this book!
Looking Inward First, is What Generates the Strategy-Shifting Process. Flynn Gets This. Few
To begin with, I will say that the book is not exactly what one might expect from a recently
retired General. For starters, there were numerous spelling errors, an assortment of colloquialisms
and some instances in which the prose took on a decidedly partisan tone. The means of documenting
sources was something akin to a blog-posting, in that he simply copied and pasted links to pages,
right into the body of the work. I would have liked to have seen a more thoroughly researched
and properly cited work. All of this was likely due to the fact that General Flynn released his
book in the days leading up to Donald J. Trump's announcement of his Vice Presidential pick. As
Flynn is apparently a close national security advisor to Trump, I can understand why his work
appears to be somewhat harried. Nonetheless, I think that the book's timeliness is useful, as
the information it contains might be helpful in guiding Americans' election choices. I also think
that despite the absence of academic rigor, it makes his work more accessible. No doubt, this
is probably one of Mr. Trump's qualities and one that has catapulted him to national fame and
serious consideration for the office he seeks. General Flynn makes a number of important points,
which, despite my foregoing adverse commentary, gives me the opportunity to endorse it as an essential
In the introductory chapter, General Flynn lays out his credentials, defines the problem, and
proceeds to inform the reader of the politically guided element that clouds policy prescriptions.
Indeed, he is correct to call attention to the fact that the Obama administration has deliberately
exercised its commanding authority in forbidding the attachment of the term "Islam" when speaking
of the threat posed by extremists who advocate and carry out violence in the religion's name.
As one who suffered at the hands of the administration for speaking truth to power, he knows all
too well what others in the Intelligence Community (IC) must suffer in order to hold onto their
In chapter one, he discusses where he came from and how he learned valuable lessons at home
and in service to his country. He also gives the reader a sense of the geopolitical context in
which Radical Islamists have been able to form alliances with our worst enemies. This chapter
also introduces the reader to some of his personal military heroes, as he delineates how their
mentorship shaped his thinking on military and intelligence matters. A key lesson to pay attention
to in this chapter is what some, including General Flynn, call 'politicization of intelligence.'
Although he maintains that both the present and previous administration have been guilty of this,
he credits the Bush administration with its strategic reconsideration of the material facts and
a search for better answers. (He mentions this again in the next chapter on p.42, signifying this
capability as a "leadership characteristic" and later recalls the president's "insight and courage"
on p. 154.)
Chapter two of The Field of Fight features an excellent summary of what transpires in a civil
war and the manner in which Iraqis began to defect from al-Qa'ida and cooperate with U.S. forces.
In this task, he explains for the layperson what many scholars do, but in far fewer pages. Again,
this makes his work more accessible. He also works through the process of intelligence failures
that are, in his opinion, produced by a superordinate policy failure housed in the upper echelons
of the military structure. In essence, it was a misperception (willful or not) that guided thinking
about the cause of the insurgency, that forbade an ability to properly address it with a population-centric
Counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy. He pays homage to the adaptability and ingenuity of General
Stanley McChrystal's Task Force 714, but again mentions the primary barrier to its success was
bureaucratic in nature.
The main thrust of chapter 3, aptly named "The Enemy Alliance," is geared toward tying together
the earlier assertion in chapter regarding the synergy between state actors like Iran, North Korea,
Syria, and the like. It has been documented elsewhere, but the Iranian (non-Arab Shi'a) connection
to the al-Qa'ida (Arab Sunni) terrorist organization can't be denied. Flynn correctly points out
how the relationship between strange bedfellows is not new in the Middle East. He briefly discusses
how this has been the case since the 1970s, with specific reference to the PLO, Iran, Syria, Hamas,
Hezbollah, Bosnia and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's. He also references President Obama's "curious sympathy"
(p. 92) for enemies in places such as Venezuela and Cuba.
General Flynn then reminds readers of some facts that have either been forgotten, or virtually
unknown, by most Americans. Namely, the role that Saddam Hussein actually played with regard to
the recruitment of foreign terrorists, the internal policies of appeasement for Islamists in his
army and the support he lent to Islamists in other countries (e.g., Egypt, Sudan and Afghanistan).
He also reminds the readers of the totalitarian mindset that consumes Islamist groups, such as
al-Qa'ida and the Islamic State. All the while, and in contrast to what his detractors might opine,
General Flynn is speaking of Radical Islam as a "tribal cult," and not taking aim at the religion
itself. This chapter is perhaps the most robust in the book and it is the sort of reading that
every American should do before they engage in conversations about the nature of political Islam.
Chapter four is a blueprint for winning what used to be called the 'global war on terror.' Although
such a phraseology is generally laughed at in many policy circles, it is clear, as General Flynn
demonstrates, that some groups and countries are locked in combat with us and our partners in
the West. Yet, as he correctly points out, the Obama administration isn't willing to use global
American leadership in order to defeat those who see us, and treat us, as their collective enemy.
General Flynn's prescription includes four strategic objectives, which I won't recite here, as
I'm not looking to violate any copyright laws. The essence of his suggestions, however, starts
with an admission of who the enemy is, a commitment to their destruction, the abandonment of any
unholy alliances we have made over the years, and a counter-ideological program for combating
what is largely an ideologically-based enemy strong suit. He points to some of the facts that
describe the dismal state of affairs in the Arab world, the most damning of which appear on pages
127-128, and then says what many are afraid to say on page 133: "Radical Islam is a totalitarian
political ideology wrapped in the Islamic religion." Nonetheless, Flynn discusses some of the
more mundane and pecuniary sources of their strength and the means that might be tried in an effort
to undermine them.
The concluding chapter of General Flynn's work draws the reader's attention to some of the works
of others that have been overlooked. He then speaks candidly of the misguided assumptions that,
coupled with political and bureaucratic reasons, slows adaptation to the changing threat environment.
Indeed, one of the reasons that I found this book so refreshing is because that sort of bold introspection
is perhaps the requisite starting point for re-thinking bad strategies. In fact, that is the essence
of both the academic and practical work that I have been doing for years. I highly recommend this
book, especially chapter 3, for any student of the IC and the military sciences.
It's ironic that the general wrote about Pattern Analysis, when DIA in late-1971 warned that
the Ho Chi Minh Trail was unusually active using this technique.
The general's comments on human intelligence and interrogation operations being virtually nonexistent
makes one wonder if all the Lessons Learned that are written after every conflict and stored away
are then never looked at again - I suspect it's true.
My unit, the 571st MI Detachment of the 525th MI Group, ran agents (HUMINT) throughout I Corps/FRAC
in Vietnam. The Easter Offensive of 1972 was actually known and reported by our unit before and
during the NVA's invasion of the South. We were virtually the only intelligence source available
for the first couple of weeks because of weather. Search the internet for The Easter Offensive
of 1972: A Failure to Use Intelligence.
At a time when so much is hanging in the balance, General Flynn's book plainly
lays out a strategy for not only fighting ISIS/ISIL but also for preventing totalitarianism from
spreading with Russia, North Korea and Cuba now asserting themselves - again.
Sadly, because there is some mild rebuke towards President Obama, my fear is people who should
read this book to gain a better understanding of the mind of the jihadist won't because they don't
like their president being called out for inadequate leadership. But the fact remains we are at
war with not just one, but several ideologies that have a common enemy - US! But this book is
not about placing blame, it is about winning and what it will take to defeat the enemies of freedom.
We take freedom for granted in the West, to the point where, unlike our enemies, we are no
longer willing to fight hard to preserve those freedoms. General Flynn makes the complicated theatre
of fighting Radical Islam easier to understand. His experience in explaining how we can and have
won on the battlefield gives me great comfort, but also inspires me to want to help fight for
the good cause of freedom.
My sincerest hope is that both Trump and Clinton will read this book and then appoint General
Flynn as our next Defense Secretary!
I totally concur with Lt. General, Michael T. Flynn, US Army, (ret), that any solution to "Radical
Islamic Terrorism" today has to also resolve the ideology issue, along side the other recommendations
that he discusses in his book. All of the radical fighting that has taken place in the world,
ever since the beginning evolution of the Islamic religion over 1400 years ago, has revolved around
radical interpretations of the Qur'an.
Until there is an Islamic religious reformation, there
will never be a lasting resolution to the current "Radical Islamic Terrorist" problem. It is a
religious ideology interpretation issue. Until that interpretation is resolved within the Islamic
world, there will always be continuing radical interpretation outbreaks, from within the entire
Islamic world, against all other forms of non-Islamic religions and their evolving cultures.
you require further insight, recommend you read " Heretic, Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now"
, by Ayaan Hirisi Ali. DCC
Provocative, bellicose, rhetorical, and patriotic, the author leaves the
reader wondering if his understanding of the enemy is hubris or sagacity. Much of that confusion
can be attributed to conditioning as a an American and seeing prosecution of American wars as
apolitical and astrategic. General Flynn's contribution to the way forward, "Field of Fight" is
certainly political and at a minimum operational strategy. His practical experience is normative
evidence to take him at his word for what he concludes is the next step to deal with radicals
and reactionaries of political Islam.
One paradox that he never solved was his deliberate attempt to frame terrorist as nothing more
that organized crime, but at the same respect condemn governments that are "Islamic Republics,"
whom attempt to enforce the laws as an ineffective solution, and attempting to associate the with
the other 1.6 billion Muslims by painting them as "Radical Islam." As if there is any relationship
to relationship to Islam other than it is the predominant religion in a majority of the area where
they commit their criminal activity. As if the political war with terrorist is a function of a
label that is of itself a oversimplification of the issues. Indeed, suggesting it is a nothing
more than 'political correctness" and ignoring the possibility that it might be a function of
setting the conditions in an otherwise polygon of political justice. This argument alone is evidence
of the his willingness to develop domestic political will for war with a simple argument. Nevertheless,
as a national strategy, it lacks the a foundational argument to motivate friendly regional actors
who's authority is founded on political Islam.
In 2008 a national election was held and the pyrrhic nature of the war in Iraq adjudicated
via the process of democratic choice that ended support for continued large scale conventional
occupation. That there is some new will to continue large scale conventional occupation seems
unlikely, and as a democratic country, leaders must find other means to reach the desired end
state, prosecuting contiguous operations to suppress, neutralize, and destroy "ALL" who use terrorism
to expand and enforce their political will with a deliberate limited wars that have methodological
end states. Lastly, sounding more like a General MacArther, the General Flynn's diffuse strategy
seems to ignore the most principles of war deduced by Von Clausewitz and Napoleon: Concentration
of force on the objective to be attacked. Instead, fighting an ideology "Radical Islam" seems
more abstract then any splatter painting of modern are in principle form it suggests a commitment
to simplicity to motivate our nation to prepare for and endure the national commitment to a long
Since we can all agree there is no magical solution, then normative pragmatism of the likes
that General. Flynn's assessment provides, must be taken into account in an operation and tactical
MDMP. Ignoring and silencing Subject Matter Experts (SME's) will net nothing more than failure,
a failure that could be measured in innocent civilian lives as a statistical body count. I could
see General Flynn's suggestions and in expertise bolstering a movement to establish a CORP level
active duty unit to prepare, plan, and implemented in phases 0, IV, & V (JP 5-0) . Bear in mind,
Counter Insurgency (COIN) was never considered a National strategy but instead at tactical strategy
and at most an operational strategy.
Several times in its nearly 250 years of existence our Nation has been at
a crossroads. Looking back on our War for Independence, the Civil War, and WWII we know the decisions
made in those tumultuous times forever altered the destiny of our Republic.
We are once again at one of those crossroads where the battle lines have been drawn, only this
time in an asymmetrical war between western democracy and the radical Islamists and nation states
who nurture them. In his timely book Field of Fight, Lt. General Michael T. Flynn provides a unique
perspective on this war and what he believes are some of the steps necessary to meet this foe.
Field of Fight begins as an autobiography in which the author gives you a sense of who he is
as a man and a soldier. This background information then provides the reader with a better perspective
through which to evaluate his analysis of the challenges we face as well as the course of action
he believes we need to take to meet those challenges.
The following are a few of the guidelines General Flynn proposes for developing a winning strategy
in our war with radical Islam and other potential foes:
1. Properly assess your environment and clearly define your enemy;
2. Face reality – for politicians, this is never an easy thing to do;
3. Understand the social context and fabric of the operational environment;
4. Recognize who's in charge of the enemy's forces.
In Field of Fight General Flynn makes the case that we are losing this war with radical Islam
because our nation's leadership has failed to develop a winning strategy. Further he opines that
our current leaders lack the clarity of vision and moral certitude that understands American democracy
is a "better way", that not all forms of human government are equal, and that there are principled
reasons worth fighting for - the very basic of those being, "life, liberty and the pursuit of
I'll admit I'm concerned about the future of our country. As a husband and a father of five
I wonder about the world we leaving for our children to inherit. I fear we have lost our moral
compass thus creating a vacuum in which human depravity as exemplified by today's radical Islamists
Equally concerning to me is what happens when the pendulum swings the other way. Will we have
the moral and principled leaders to check our indignation before it goes too far? When that heart
rending atrocity which is sure to come finally pushes the American people to white hot wrath who
will hold our own passions in check? In a nation where Judeo-Christian moral absolutes are an
outdated notion what will keep us from becoming that which we most hate?
As I stated at the start of this review, today we are at a crossroads. Once again our nation
needs principled men and women in positions of leadership who understand the Field of Fight as
described by General Flynn and have the wisdom and courage to navigate this battlefield.
* * *
In summary, although I don't agree with everything written in this book I found it to be an
educational read which will provided me with much food for thought over the coming months. As
a representative republic choosing good leadership requires that we as citizens understand the
problems and challenges we face as a nation. Today radical Islam is one of those challenges and
General Flynn's book Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its
Allies gives a much needed perspective on the subject.
Gen Flynn has been in the news a lot lately. He apparently did not get on well in DC with his
views on fighting terrorism. That is very relevant now as we are seeking better ways to fight
ISIS and terror in general. I read his book today to learn what is on his mind. Flynn had a lot
of experience starting in the 82nd Airborne and was almost always in intelligence work. Army intelligence
is narrowly focused - where is the enemy, how many of them are there, how are they armed and what
is the best way to destroy them. Undoubtedly he was good at this. However, that is not the kind
of intelligence we need to defeat ISIS. Flynn's book shows no sign of cultural awareness, which
is the context by which we must build intelligence about our opponent. In Iraq, he did learn the
difference between who was Sunni and who was Shia but that was it. He shows no sign of any historical
knowledge about these groups and how they think and live. In looking at Afghanistan, he seems
unaware of the various clans and languages amongst different people. The 2 primary languages of
Afghanistan are Pashto and Dari. Dari is essentially the same as Farsi, so the Persian influence
has been strong in the country for a long time. Flynn seems totally unaware. Intelligence in his
world is obtained from interrogation and captured documents. They are processed fast and tell
him who their next target should be. This kind of work is not broad enough to give him a strategic
background. He sees USA's challenges in the world as a big swath of enemies that are all connected
and monolithic. North Korea, China, Iran, Russia, Syria, ISIS, and so forth. All need to be dealt
with in a forceful manner. He never seems to think about matching resources with objective.
This monlithic view of our opponents is obviously wrong. Pres George W Bush tried it that way
with the Axis of Evil. The 1950's Cold War was all built in fear of the monolithic Soviet Union
and China. All these viewpoints were failures.
Flynn does not see it though. In the book, Flynn says invading Iraq in 2003 might have been the
wrong choice. He would have invaded Iran. The full Neocon plan was for 7 countries in 5 years,
right after knocking down Iraq, then we would do the same to Iran. I hope we have lost a lot of
that hubris by now. But with poor vision by leaders like Flynn, we might get caught up again in
To beat ISIS and Al Qaeda type groups we need patience and allies. We have to dry up the source
of the terrorists that want to die. That will be done with a combination of cultural outreaches
as well as armed force.
I am sure the Presidential candidates will both see that Flynn does not have that recipe. Where
is a General that does? We have often made this mistake. Sixty Six years ago, we felt good that
Gen Douglas MacArthur "knew the Oriental mind" and he would guid us to victory in Korea. That
ended up as a disaster at the end of 1950. I think we are better off at working with leaders that
understand the people that are trying to terrorize us. Generals don't develop those kinds of empathic
Like his new boss, Flynn appears very comfortable with the current Russian regime, working with
Russia Today , the Kremlin's propaganda TV network. He apparently
received classified intelligence briefings while running a lobbying firm for foreign clients.
He seems to favor working with Russia to combat Islamist terrorists while turning a blind eye
to Russia's designs on Ukraine and its support for the Assad regime in Syria.
... ... ..
In the brief time since he won the election, Trump's first call with a world leader was not
with a trusted US ally but with the Egyptian dictator President al-Sisi. He sat with prime minister
Abe of Japan this week, but his aides told the Japanese
to believe every word Trump said.
He met with the populist right wing British politician Nigel Farage before meeting the British
prime minister Theresa May. But he somehow found time to meet with several Indian
real estate developers to discuss his property interests with them, and the Trump Organization
Kolkata deal on Friday.
Amid his many interactions with foreign powers, Trump is speaking without briefing papers from
the State Department because his transition team is in such chaos that they have yet to establish
meaningful contact with the nation's foreign policy professionals.
"President-elect Donald Trump has named retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn as his new
national security adviser, according to a close source. The former DIA chief has been criticized
in US circles for refusing to take an anti-Russian stance."
http://DemoCast.TV Controversial issues re: US Foreign Policy- Iran, Russia, & China - with
veterans affairs-advocate, newly-retired Lt. Gen. Flynn at the National Assoc. of Broadcasters
convention in Las Vegas. Iran, China, & Russia, acc'd to US Defense Intel Agency chief, LtGen
Michael Flynn (ret.)
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political,
human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice
issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on
this site is distributed without profit exclusivly for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
ABUSE: IPs or network segments from which we detect a stream of probes might be blocked for no
less then 90 days. Multiple types of probes increase this period.
Original materials copyright belong
to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only
in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development
of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.