General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWho was at Maralago on Dec 29, 2016?
Flynn admitting telling them...
https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download
Page 2 paragraph c. Then page 3 paragraph h.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)And Donald J. Trump, as one of his first acts as President of the United States, appointed Michael Flynn to be his National Security Adviser? I wonder what kind of research Trump did into Flynn's history before naming him to such a sensitive and important security post?
Mr. President? Donald? You there, buddy? Care to answer a couple of questions about this? The American people deserve to know, don't they?
Irish_Dem
(47,549 posts)marylandblue
(12,344 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,549 posts)So they had probably cause that long ago?
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)I suspect it went like this: The NSA routinely intercepts phone calls from Russian officials. No warrant needed for that. Some of these calls were with Trump administration officials and they got enough evidence to refer the information to the FBI. At some point after that, the FBI started to tap Flynn's phone, and probably lots of other phones too.
Irish_Dem
(47,549 posts)with a nothing burger? Just making a side comment here.
Thank you Maryland, for reminding me of the timeline and what happened...
so much information is flying around, hard to keep track of all of it...
So the NSA routinely taps Russian officials, learned that Trump officials were
talking to the Russians. NSA contacts the FBI which starts tapping Flynn and most likely
who else? Manafort, Jared, Trump himself???
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)Tapping Trump himself might have been crossing a line. Also, at least based on information we have so far, they probably made Trump avoid any direct contact with Russians during the campaign. Still, they might have Trump on tape talking to his tapped subordinates.
Irish_Dem
(47,549 posts)If the FBI has Trump talking to subordinates about Russian contacts, what will Mueller do?
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)A lot of people on DU disagree with me, but we are in an unprecedented situation. When there is no precedent, facts make the law, not the other way around. In this case, I believe Mueller will present massive evidence of serious crimes by Trump. The courts will have to respond at last to an assertion that Nixon made, "If the President does it, it isn't illegal." That was considered lunacy back then. Now it's a real question.
For me, the answer goes back to first principles, the thing we all learned in elementary school - we don't have a King because the people are sovereign. Sovereigns, and only sovereigns, are immune from prosecution. So unless we are ready to submit to King Donald I, he can be prosecuted even without being impeached.
Irish_Dem
(47,549 posts)As a way to avoid more damage to the country and GOP.
But you and I could both be correct, first Mueller indicts Trump, then he is forced to resign. A deal is made with him to resign or face trial.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Dread Pirate Roberts
(1,897 posts)There is a reason this lists the individual Flynn talked to as "PTT OFFICIAL" and not by name. Flynn certainly knows who he talked to and that means Mueller knows as well. This is most certainly turning it up a notch (or two or three) Give the rack a turn!
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,549 posts)MrsCoffee
(5,803 posts)Response to NightWatcher (Original post)
loyalsister This message was self-deleted by its author.