Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Ron Paul
See other Ron Paul Articles

Title: America's spies anonymously took down Michael Flynn. That is deeply worrying
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://theweek.com/articles/680068/ ... ael-flynn-that-deeply-worrying
Published: Feb 15, 2017
Author: aa
Post Date: 2017-02-15 10:23:45 by HAPPY2BME-4UM
Keywords: None
Views: 37
Comments: 3

The United States is much better off without Michael Flynn serving as national security adviser. But no one should be cheering the way he was brought down.

The whole episode is evidence of the precipitous and ongoing collapse of America's democratic institutions — not a sign of their resiliency. Flynn's ouster was a soft coup (or political assassination) engineered by anonymous intelligence community bureaucrats. The results might be salutary, but this isn't the way a liberal democracy is supposed to function.

Unelected intelligence analysts work for the president, not the other way around. Far too many Trump critics appear not to care that these intelligence agents leaked highly sensitive information to the press — mostly because Trump critics are pleased with the result. "Finally," they say, "someone took a stand to expose collusion between the Russians and a senior aide to the president!" It is indeed important that someone took such a stand. But it matters greatly who that someone is and how they take their stand. Members of the unelected, unaccountable intelligence community are not the right someone, especially when they target a senior aide to the president by leaking anonymously to newspapers the content of classified phone intercepts, where the unverified, unsubstantiated information can inflict politically fatal damage almost instantaneously.

President Trump was roundly mocked among liberals for that tweet. But he is, in many ways, correct. These leaks are an enormous problem. And in a less polarized context, they would be recognized immediately for what they clearly are: an effort to manipulate public opinion for the sake of achieving a desired political outcome. It's weaponized spin.

This doesn't mean the outcome was wrong. I have no interest in defending Flynn, who appears to be an atrocious manager prone to favoring absurd conspiracy theories over more traditional forms of intelligence. He is just about the last person who should be giving the president advice about foreign policy. And for all I know, Flynn did exactly what the anonymous intelligence community leakers allege — promised the Russian ambassador during the transition that the incoming Trump administration would back off on sanctions proposed by the outgoing Obama administration.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: HAPPY2BME-4UM (#0)

The United States is much better off without Michael Flynn serving as national security adviser.

No evidence is provided; just an opinion.

DWornock  posted on  2017-02-15   11:15:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: HAPPY2BME-4UM (#0)

The United States is much better off without Michael Flynn serving as national security adviser.

Why? Because he was long a registered Democrat, appointed to Intel offices twice by Obama?

-------

"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC

GreyLmist  posted on  2017-02-15   20:42:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: DWornock (#1)

No evidence is provided; just an opinion.

According to Daniel Larison, Flynn was wrong about everything except Russia

Ada  posted on  2017-02-15   21:11:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest