The Missing Pieces in the Flynn Story - NYT Editorial Board

[DonViejo]

President Trump may have thought the departure of his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, would end the controversy over his administration’s involvement with Russia, but the damning revelations keep coming. The whole fiasco underscores the dysfunction and dishonesty of his White House and how ill prepared it is to protect the nation.

It’s unlikely that Mr. Flynn would have been pushed out absent a revelation on Monday by The Washington Post: that the Justice Department told the White House in January that Mr. Flynn had misled senior officials about a phone call with the Russian ambassador. Justice told the White House that, contrary to his claims, Mr. Flynn had discussed American sanctions against Russia with the ambassador. The discrepancy between what Mr. Flynn had said publicly and what the Russians (and American intelligence officials) knew made Mr. Flynn vulnerable to Russian blackmail. But the White House evidently didn’t feel the need to act on that danger as long as it was concealed from the public.

On Tuesday, the White House admitted that Mr. Trump was told more than two weeks ago about Mr. Flynn’s deception, even though the president told reporters on Friday that he was unaware of a news report to that effect. Mr. Flynn, a hothead and an ideologue, was not fit to be national security adviser in the first place. That Mr. Trump clung to such a compromised person in such a sensitive position is at best an abysmal failure of judgment. As late as Monday, Mr. Flynn was in security briefings and had access to the president.

In his resignation letter, Mr. Flynn said he had given senior officials “incomplete information” about the phone call. F.B.I. agents interviewed Mr. Flynn days after the inauguration on that same subject, The Times reported on Tuesday. That means he could be exposed to a felony charge if he lied to them as well. The Times also reported Tuesday that current and former American officials said other Trump associates and campaign officials had had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.

more
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/opinion/the-missing-pieces-in-the-flynn-story.html?emc=edit_th_20170215&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=57435284&_r=0

[yallerdawg]

1. "...as long as it was concealed from the public."

The ultimate test of governing in a free society has to be honesty, openness, and transparency.

If you have to hide and lie about what you do - and cannot and will not answer why - then you have lost "the consent of the governed."

[drm604]

2. We all realized months ago that there were Russian influences in the Trump campaign.

It's been obvious for a long time.

If we knew, then how is it possible that Trump and Pence didn't know? How is it possible that congressional leaders didn't know?

They all knew that something was going on and they were either part of it or they put party over country and ignored it.

[brush]

3. This NYT story is well worth the whole read, and it's not that long.

It lays out the time line of Flynn's lies and denials, and when the White House and trump knew of Flynn's lies.

It also puts the onus on how repugs are trying to avoid investigating the huge elephant in the room of the trump campaign and now White House have apparently colluded with the Russians.

Coming an old newspaper guy, I must say I'm proud of "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post" for the real, actual reporting on this huge story.

TV talking heads can't do this, and bloggers are mostly just news aggregators.

Newspapers aren't dead yet as they seem to be the only ones who can do this kind of real shoe leather reporting that digs out the real facts.