Happening Now: Just minutes ago White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer completed a briefing where it was no surprise to anyone in the room that the majority of the questions centered around the former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s resignation last evening.
When asked repeatedly, Spicer kept to the message that Trump asked for Flynn’s resignation solely on the basis of “eroding trust” and not on any grounds of illegality or misconduct.
Which begs a couple questions: 1) Were the items Flynn discussed with the Russian Ambassador, as it relates to U.S. sanctions levied against Russia, in violation of the Logan Act as previously reported? 2) If there was no proponent or question of illegality to the discussions, then why, and for weeks on end, did Flynn feel the need to mislead the White House regarding the contents of his discussion with the Russian Ambassador?
In light of the specific language of the Logan Act, it seems as though the White House alternative facts machine was in full spin mode when Spicer relegated Flynn’s resignation solely as a matter of “erosion of trust.” Section 953 of the Logan Act reads os follows:
- 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
- Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
- -Logan Act, Section 953
Of a certainty the pros on Capitol Hill will sort this out with their endless independent investigations, special prosecutors, etc. The fallout, of course, is causing a bipartisan revolt against the Trump administration. GOP heavyweights like John Cornyn, the senate’s second-ranking republican, Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina and Sen. John McCain of Arizona are among those calling for further investigation not only into Flynn, but President Trump as well. This just in from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R)-Kentucky:
It’s highly likely Senate Intelligence Committee will examine Michael Flynn’s talks with Russian Ambassador.
So it makes sense that perhaps Trump’s only way out of this debacle is to be, what we here at E.O.T.I have termed, retro-transparent. First and foremost, Trump should immediately tell the people what he knew and when he knew it as it pertains to Flynn’s activities. But there is another point on which he could stem the proverbial blood bath:
His tax returns.
It has long been a question as to why Trump simply refuses to reveal his tax returns. One of the precise points of concern in this regard is the high probability that Trump has business interests in Russia and very possibly with Russian President Vladimir Putin himself. The intelligence community as well as factions from both the House and the Senate have repeatedly expressed concern over Trump’s unwillingness to be forthcoming with his returns.
Think about it: If Trump called a press conference and whipped out his returns for all to see, It’s guaranteed the move would not only would it change the news cycle but the countries perception of him and his administration at this volatile time. It would 1) at once quell the question surrounding the real nature of his wealth and thereby backing up his braggadocio on the matter, 2) shut up every single mouth that has slammed his lack of transparency and 3) (and most importantly) reveal once and for all to the world that he has no ties at all with Russia, no business interests in the region and therefore he could not now nor ever be blackmailed or leveraged by the Russian government in any shape, form or fashion.
But will he even so much as consider taking this lifeline? Mm … Our guess is not so much.
More as this story develops.
Think Passionately. Disrupt Strategically.
-A. Lawrence Haskins
United States Congress: (202) 225-3121
ALH Around the Web: