Trump: It Would be OK With Me If Flynn Did Talk Sanctions
Trump’s performance yesterday was literally Orwellian with him essentially declaring 2+2=5 when he said that his electoral college margin was the largest since Reagan. Actually there have been 5 winners with larger EC wins than he had-and none of them needed James Comey’s help either.
When he was called on this fact his response was ‘But that’s what I was told.’ Then he should find that person and fire them for their shocking ignorance-or dishonesty as the case may be.
Meanwhile Trump’s explanation on the Michael Flynn debacle continues to be incoherent. Basically A,B,C all of the above and none of the above.
“In a long, theatrical news conference that included off-the-cuff remarks about whether he should “shoot” a Russian spy ship off the US coast, Mr Trump said he fired Mr Flynn because he had misled Mike Pence, the vice-president, about his conversations with the Russian envoy rather than because the retired general had taken actions that may have been illegal. Under the 1799 Logan Act, private citizens are barred from conducting foreign policy without the consent of the government of the day. “Mike was doing his job. He was calling countries and his counterparts. So it would certainly have been OK with me if he did it,” Mr Trump said when asked if he told Mr Flynn to discuss sanctions. “I would have directed him to do it if I thought he wasn’t doing it. I didn’t direct him but I would have directed him because that’s his job.”
So he was fired for misleading Mike Pence but Trump also said that he would be fine if Flynn did talk about the sanctions and would have told him to do it if he didn’t do it.
Not to put too fine a point on this but doesn’t this mean then that: Trump wanted him to talk about the sanctions and assumed he was doing it, and that he assumed he would do it because: he told him to do it?
Not to put too fine a point on it. But that’s where you get with Trump’s answer of: A, not-A, both A and not-A, either A or not-A, and neither A or not-A.
If that’s true-and logically that’s the only coherent conclusion then actually if anyone lied to Mike Pence it wasn’t Flynn but Trump himself?
But Flynn did lie to: the FBI. Which is a felony.
“Former national security adviser Michael Flynn denied to FBI agents in an interview last month that he had discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country’s ambassador to the United States before President Trump took office, contradicting the contents of intercepted communications collected by intelligence agencies, current and former U.S. officials said.”
“The Jan. 24 interview potentially puts Flynn in legal jeopardy, as lying to the FBI is a felony, but any decision to prosecute would ultimately lie with the Justice Department. Some officials said bringing a case could prove difficult in part because Flynn may attempt to parse the definition of sanctions.”
Meanwhile Hugh Hewitt is not a bad Orwellian himself.
“Stop the Trump hysteria. His early stumbles are nothing new.”
Sure, every President is investigated for collusion with a foreign power in a bid to flip an election, loses a Muslim ban in Court within two weeks, is at 40% after three weeks on the job, and has to fire the NSC adviser after 24 days.
Every President needs James Comey to get them in.
Flynn lied to the FBI. No big deal. Hewitt would not be saying anything different if it were Hillary Clinton who had provably lied to the FBI.
You know, Republicans like Hewitt have a sense of perspective. They get excited over important things like when they spent 140 hours in the 1990s investigating the WH Christmas list. That was something worth getting ‘hysterical’ about.
Nothing to see here. Also Trump had the biggest win since Reagan and 2+2=5.
P.S. If you enjoy my blog and my support of #TheResistance-I’m also considering a 2018 run against GOP Congressmen Peter King of the NY 2nd district-then please consider a donation.