https://www.google.com/amp/www.latimes.c...ent=safari
Republican senators called Tuesday for a full and open investigation into President Trump’s connections to Russia, a startling crack in party unity as the White House rushed to regroup after the departure of national security advisor Michael Flynn over his admission that he misled administration officials about his contacts with a Russian diplomat.
“We should look into it exhaustively so that at the end of this process nobody wonders whether there was a stone left unturned, and shouldn't reach conclusions before you have the information that you need to have to make those conclusions,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), a member of the Senate intelligence committee and vice chairman of the Senate Republican conference, told a St. Louis radio station.
Establishment politicians call for non-establishment President to be investigated. Shocking
The investigation is to get the straight scoop. What the other side is failing to realize is that these conversations occurred on Obama's watch and nothing was brought to light. Why not address it back in mid December? Why not address it with the incoming POTUS? Why not address it to the Senate, upon Gen. Flynn's confirmation? FYI, Gen. Flynn was a civilian and prior to Trump selecting Flynn as NSA. Fishy, but not for the reasons the dems want to push.
Quote:https://www.google.com/amp/www.latimes.c...ent=safari
Republican senators called Tuesday for a full and open investigation into President Trump’s connections to Russia, a startling crack in party unity as the White House rushed to regroup after the departure of national security advisor Michael Flynn over his admission that he misled administration officials about his contacts with a Russian diplomat.
“We should look into it exhaustively so that at the end of this process nobody wonders whether there was a stone left unturned, and shouldn't reach conclusions before you have the information that you need to have to make those conclusions,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), a member of the Senate intelligence committee and vice chairman of the Senate Republican conference, told a St. Louis radio station.
As Americans, they should absolutely look into this regardless of party. I applaud them for doing something that SHOULD be done.
So what's the big story here? RUSSIA!
Quote:So what's the big story here? RUSSIA!
The risk to national security maybe?
Quote:The risk to national security maybe?
Explain the risks. And no, I dont mean, post a link to a CNN article. I mean, YOU. Tell me why I should be super concerned that Flynn talked about sanctions with an ambassador.
Quote:Explain the risks. And no, I dont mean, post a link to a CNN article. I mean, YOU. Tell me why I should be super concerned that Flynn talked about sanctions with an ambassador.
Why did Flynn lie?
Just another shining example of the Amateur hour at the White House.
Quote:Explain the risks. And no, I dont mean, post a link to a CNN article. I mean, YOU. Tell me why I should be super concerned that Flynn talked about sanctions with an ambassador.
If their conversations involved assisting a presidential candidate during a sovereign nation's general election, I don't see how you couldn't see it as a risk.
Quote:Explain the risks. And no, I dont mean, post a link to a CNN article. I mean, YOU. Tell me why I should be super concerned that Flynn talked about sanctions with an ambassador.
They're all way too friendly with Russia and the SR Advisor withholding/lying about convos with Kremlin/Putin or whomever. None of this concerns you, huh?
Edit: you might want to start being curious about the fact that the GOP itself is concerned enough to launch an investigation.
Quote:If their conversations involved assisting a presidential candidate during a sovereign nation's general election, I don't see how you couldn't see it as a risk.
Except, that's not what happened. Liberals like you seem to think that he gave them the ip address, username and password to the DNC leading up to the election. It has never been proven that what wikileaks exposed leading up to the election was information that came from anywhere within the U.S. or Russia. It also has never been proven that a nation state or otherwise is responsible for the information given to wikileaks. The hack into the DNC was nowhere near the sophisticated attack on Iranian nuclear facilities or other things.
It's manufactured fear mongering by the left.
Quote:They're all way too friendly with Russia and the SR Advisor withholding/lying about convos with Kremlin/Putin or whomever. None of this concerns you, huh?
Edit: you might want to start being curious about the fact that the GOP itself is concerned enough to launch an investigation.
The "GOP itself" isn't concerned enough to call for an investigation, it's the establishment branch of the GOP. The SR Adviser withheld and/or lied about the conversations
publicly. It's possible that he did the same privately, though I doubt it. General Flynn has been involved in the intelligence community far too long to think that his conversations were private. My best guess is that too much information was leaked to the press where his mistake couldn't be covered up or concealed.
Quote:Why did Flynn lie?
Just another shining example of the Amateur hour at the White House.
Did he lie or just not believe it was all the important? This conversation did not take place in an official capacity.
Quote:Did he lie or just not believe it was all the important? This conversation did not take place in an official capacity.
He lied!
Wow! Really? You are one partisan individual
Quote:Why did Flynn lie?
Just another shining example of the Amateur hour at the White House.
That's a fair question.
And an unfair conclusion. All it means is he broke a rule and though he could cover it up to avoid getting in trouble.
Quote:They're all way too friendly with Russia and the SR Advisor withholding/lying about convos with Kremlin/Putin or whomever. None of this concerns you, huh?
Edit: you might want to start being curious about the fact that the GOP itself is concerned enough to launch an investigation.
Too friendly? I don't think it is a bad thing to form relations with other countries. Why in this age are so many people conditioned to believe we must avoid Russia like the plague? There was no White House political or monetary connection associated with this latest news. In fact, the only real issue is the fact Gen Flynn had a conversation with the Russian ambassador as a civilian, non-affiliated entity. I'm more concerned with why the previous administration kept this information to themselves and we are conveniently hearing about it now.
Quote:That's a fair question.
And an unfair conclusion. All it means is he broke a rule and though he could cover it up to avoid getting in trouble.
Which most learn not to do when they're 5!
Quote:Too friendly? I don't think it is a bad thing to form relations with other countries. Why in this age are so many people conditioned to believe we must avoid Russia like the plague? There was no White House political or monetary connection associated with this latest news. In fact, the only real issue is the fact Gen Flynn had a conversation with the Russian ambassador as a civilian, non-affiliated entity. I'm more concerned with why the previous administration kept this information to themselves and we are conveniently hearing about it now.
It's Obama's fault!!
Good one!
Quote:They're all way too friendly with Russia and the SR Advisor withholding/lying about convos with Kremlin/Putin or whomever. None of this concerns you, huh?
Edit: you might want to start being curious about the fact that the GOP itself is concerned enough to launch an investigation.
Why should I be concerned about being friendly with Russia?
The GOP? I really don't care what the collective GOP thinks since they are just as corrupt as the Democrat Party. There are only a few diamonds in the rough like Rand Paul.
Quote:Which most learn not to do when they're 5!
that's quite a judgment coming from a hillary voter
Quote:If their conversations involved assisting a presidential candidate during a sovereign nation's general election, I don't see how you couldn't see it as a risk.
Assisting how? Revealing corruption within the DNC? HAHA. That was a GD public service for God's SAKE!
But no, I don't believe all the fake news that it was Russia behind the DNC hacks that led to Hillary's down fall. That's nothing but lies, and Obama doubled down on the lies by issuing sanctions on Russia all based on fabricated information.
And before you scoff at that idea. You should well know that the government falsifying information is no new tactic. Take the Bush admin for example and Iraq. Hey, look, CIA says they got bombs and stuff. Better take em out. We have the "evidence".
Quote:that's quite a judgment coming from a hillary voter
Only because the crap show happening now is what I feared most.