The Many Faces of US Politics...

Started by Tyrones own, March 20, 2009, 09:29:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Gabriel_Hurl

Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:43:57 PM
I'm probably missing something really obvious here. I understand that he's admitting that he lied.  However, what is it that he's actually supposed to have said or done to the Russian ambassador? Was it not some chit chat about reacting to sanctions? Is that not allowed?

No - it isn't

J70


Esmarelda

Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on December 01, 2017, 04:47:48 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:43:57 PM
I'm probably missing something really obvious here. I understand that he's admitting that he lied.  However, what is it that he's actually supposed to have said or done to the Russian ambassador? Was it not some chit chat about reacting to sanctions? Is that not allowed?

No - it isn't
Why not?

J70

Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:49:51 PM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on December 01, 2017, 04:47:48 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:43:57 PM
I'm probably missing something really obvious here. I understand that he's admitting that he lied.  However, what is it that he's actually supposed to have said or done to the Russian ambassador? Was it not some chit chat about reacting to sanctions? Is that not allowed?

No - it isn't
Why not?

You don't think conducting diplomacy contradictory to the policies and actions of the sitting administration is a problem?

Esmarelda

Quote from: J70 on December 01, 2017, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:49:51 PM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on December 01, 2017, 04:47:48 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:43:57 PM
I'm probably missing something really obvious here. I understand that he's admitting that he lied.  However, what is it that he's actually supposed to have said or done to the Russian ambassador? Was it not some chit chat about reacting to sanctions? Is that not allowed?

No - it isn't
Why not?

You don't think conducting diplomacy contradictory to the policies and actions of the sitting administration is a problem?
I'm not saying anything. I'm asking.

When did these conversations take place? Was it the period between the election and the inauguration? Weren't they related to sanctions that Obama had put in place?

What I've read, and it's only what I've read, is that Flynn said that "he did not ask Russia's ambassador to the US to refrain from escalating the situation after Washington had imposed sanctions on Russia" and "that he did not recall the Russian ambassador telling him that Russia had chosen to moderate its response to US sanctions as a result of his request".

Is this a huge deal?

J70

Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 05:01:52 PM
Quote from: J70 on December 01, 2017, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:49:51 PM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on December 01, 2017, 04:47:48 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 04:43:57 PM
I'm probably missing something really obvious here. I understand that he's admitting that he lied.  However, what is it that he's actually supposed to have said or done to the Russian ambassador? Was it not some chit chat about reacting to sanctions? Is that not allowed?

No - it isn't
Why not?

You don't think conducting diplomacy contradictory to the policies and actions of the sitting administration is a problem?
I'm not saying anything. I'm asking.

When did these conversations take place? Was it the period between the election and the inauguration? Weren't they related to sanctions that Obama had put in place?

What I've read, and it's only what I've read, is that Flynn said that "he did not ask Russia's ambassador to the US to refrain from escalating the situation after Washington had imposed sanctions on Russia" and "that he did not recall the Russian ambassador telling him that Russia had chosen to moderate its response to US sanctions as a result of his request".

Is this a huge deal?

Big enough that Flynn is cooperating after taking a guilty plea for lying to the FBI. I guess it ultimately depends on what that cooperation entails.

Esmarelda

True. Just thought I was missing something given the way it's such a big story.

I imagine it'll amount to very little.

Gabriel_Hurl

Quote from: Esmarelda on December 01, 2017, 05:14:48 PM
True. Just thought I was missing something given the way it's such a big story.

I imagine it'll amount to very little.

I imagine you'll be incorrect


Jell 0 Biafra

I've asked some lawyer friends of mine whether anything illegal--other than lying to intelligence agencies/government officials--has happened.  Their answer was no.  Unless they received something of value from Russian agencies, and it isn't clear that information about Clinton counts as that.

Jell 0 Biafra

Anyway, once the republicans get their tax cut, they'll probably be more willing to countenance impeachment, or perhaps resignation.

heganboy

25th amendment - section 4

by then they will all be so rich they won't care...
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity

Gabriel_Hurl

Whitey?

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/01/blake-farenthold-taxpayer-funds-sexual-harassment-274458

QuoteRep. Blake Farenthold used taxpayer money to settle a sexual harassment claim brought by his former spokesman — the only known sitting member of Congress to have used a little-known congressional account to pay an accuser, sources told POLITICO.

Lauren Greene, the Texas Republican's former communications director, sued her boss in December 2014 over allegations of gender discrimination, sexual harassment and creating a hostile work environment.

Greene claimed in the lawsuit that another Farenthold aide told her the lawmaker had "sexual fantasies" and "wet dreams" about Greene. She also claimed that Farenthold "regularly drank to excess" and told her in February 2014 that he was "estranged from his wife and had not had sex with her in years."

When she complained about comments Farenthold and a male staffer made to her, Greene said the congressman improperly fired her. She filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, but the case was later dropped after both parties reached a private settlement.

No information was ever released on that agreement.

House Administration Committee Chairman Gregg Harper (R-Miss.) told GOP lawmakers in a closed-door Friday morning meeting that only one House office in the past five years had used an Office of Compliance account to settle a sexual harassment complaint. Harper said in that one instance, the settlement totaled $84,000.


Gmac

Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on December 01, 2017, 05:49:28 PM
Whitey?

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/01/blake-farenthold-taxpayer-funds-sexual-harassment-274458

QuoteRep. Blake Farenthold used taxpayer money to settle a sexual harassment claim brought by his former spokesman — the only known sitting member of Congress to have used a little-known congressional account to pay an accuser, sources told POLITICO.

Lauren Greene, the Texas Republican's former communications director, sued her boss in December 2014 over allegations of gender discrimination, sexual harassment and creating a hostile work environment.

Greene claimed in the lawsuit that another Farenthold aide told her the lawmaker had "sexual fantasies" and "wet dreams" about Greene. She also claimed that Farenthold "regularly drank to excess" and told her in February 2014 that he was "estranged from his wife and had not had sex with her in years."

When she complained about comments Farenthold and a male staffer made to her, Greene said the congressman improperly fired her. She filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, but the case was later dropped after both parties reached a private settlement.

No information was ever released on that agreement.

House Administration Committee Chairman Gregg Harper (R-Miss.) told GOP lawmakers in a closed-door Friday morning meeting that only one House office in the past five years had used an Office of Compliance account to settle a sexual harassment complaint. Harper said in that one instance, the settlement totaled $84,000.


that blonde wan looks fairly game

J70

Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on December 01, 2017, 05:49:28 PM
Whitey?

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/01/blake-farenthold-taxpayer-funds-sexual-harassment-274458

QuoteRep. Blake Farenthold used taxpayer money to settle a sexual harassment claim brought by his former spokesman — the only known sitting member of Congress to have used a little-known congressional account to pay an accuser, sources told POLITICO.

Lauren Greene, the Texas Republican's former communications director, sued her boss in December 2014 over allegations of gender discrimination, sexual harassment and creating a hostile work environment.

Greene claimed in the lawsuit that another Farenthold aide told her the lawmaker had "sexual fantasies" and "wet dreams" about Greene. She also claimed that Farenthold "regularly drank to excess" and told her in February 2014 that he was "estranged from his wife and had not had sex with her in years."

When she complained about comments Farenthold and a male staffer made to her, Greene said the congressman improperly fired her. She filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, but the case was later dropped after both parties reached a private settlement.

No information was ever released on that agreement.

House Administration Committee Chairman Gregg Harper (R-Miss.) told GOP lawmakers in a closed-door Friday morning meeting that only one House office in the past five years had used an Office of Compliance account to settle a sexual harassment complaint. Harper said in that one instance, the settlement totaled $84,000.



The round boy in the pyjamas?

Don't all rush at once ladies!

Gabriel_Hurl