Michael Flynn
He always seemed a little bit nutty to me. I appreciated the fact that he thought Islam was a big threat, and it didn’t bother me at all that he wanted better relations with Russia. But he seemed to be lacking in managerial competency. Kind of like a Newt Gingrich but not as smart. Yes, that’s another thing about Flynn, smart enough to get promoted and appear to know what he’s doing (perhaps an IQ of 120) but lacking in higher level intelligence of the kind that Steve Bannon has.
* * *
Trump is not one to back away from a fight with the media. I don’t think that Trump has suddenly become soft.
Trump likes to reward people who are loyal to him, and especially those who were loyal to him back when everyone said he had no chance of winning anything and that anyone who associated with Trump was an evil racist. Flynn was one of those loyalists whom Trump rewarded.
But Trump has also shown that he can get rid of people too, like he got rid of Chris Christie. I think that Trump saw this as an opportunity to get rid of Flynn because he didn’t turn out as well (for reasons I explained above) as Trump hoped.
Also Trump seems to have a genuine dislike for people who used their government careers as a springboard into getting rich from lobbying, and Flynn was involved in that.
Lion of the Blogosphere 
Agreed. Always seemed like a really poor fit for National Security Advisor. I won’t miss him, I just don’t like the appearance-of-debacle that his departure has caused.
This gives Trump another shot to appoint a legit paleocon realist to a major foreign policy position. Given that so far his record is 0.5 out of several (I’m counting Mattis as half a paleocon realist), I don’t like the chances.
Greg Pandatshang
February 15, 2017 at 12:02 PM
What’s a paleocon realist? The Daniel Larison-Scott McConnell “the Eastern Hemisphere must forever belong to the unbreakable Russia-Iran alliance as punishment for America’s sins in Iraq” crowd? Those guys are just another kind of cuck.
IHTG
February 15, 2017 at 1:22 PM
“Those guys are just another kind of cuck.”
Right, the rightists who think that America should be weak and limited are cucks, but are more like castrati.
Cuckservatives who think that white Americans should die off and be replaced with Hispanics who adhere to the Constitution rightfully deserve scorn. The paleocons/alt-righters who want for white Americans to have control over their own country are better, but not if they believe the US should be weak, divided, and utterly impotent in foreign affairs.
I don’t have any particular hatred of Russia, but if this is all a Great Game between different powers, I want my team to the be the strongest. What’s the point in having a country if it’s not going to win?
Sid
February 15, 2017 at 1:43 PM
Pat Buchanan is the grand old man of paleocon realists. I doubt he is committed to Russian victory.
Greg Pandatshang
February 15, 2017 at 3:18 PM
“Pat Buchanan is the grand old man of paleocon realists. I doubt he is committed to Russian victory.”
Pat Buchanan shoots straight and is a patriot. He’s wrong quite often but he’s a valuable commentator and someone whose words I respect.
On the other hand, a lot of the writers on Unz.com are whackos who believe Stalin was a relatively good leader, wish Georgia would be reincorporated into Russia at gunpoint (Georgian public opinion and self-determination be damned!), claimed the 2014 decline in oil prices would cause the US stock market to collapse, and have propounded all other kinds of insane, black-hearted, and altogether worthless ideas. (And no, I’m not putting words in their mouths. Those are articles those idiots have published.) They’re either suffering from dementia or they’re Kremlin sockpuppets, but they are their own class of cuck.
Sid
February 15, 2017 at 10:25 PM
I agree with you, to the extent that I pay any attention to those people. I wouldn’t want thesaker for National Security Advisor. In principle, an American “realist” who isn’t concerned with America’s interests isn’t much of a realist.
How about John Dolan? I doubt he’s too busy. But, nah, I’ll bet he’s a bit of a commie when he isn’t pretending to be Gary Brecher.
Greg Pandatshang
February 16, 2017 at 12:33 AM
Paleocons often label themselves as realists when they’re actually isolationists/noninterventionists. Many paleocons like Ron Paul, Paul Craig Roberts, Justin Raimondo and Lew Rockwell are screwballs. That said, neocons like Kristol, McCain, and Graham have been disastrous since the Cold War ended.
Lewis Medlock
February 16, 2017 at 12:01 PM
I guess I won’t argue that Ron Paul is a non-screwball, but he’s the wisest, savviest, decentist screwball in the country. The king of the screwballs, one might say. I haven’t read anything from PCR, Raimondo, or Rockwell in years, so I can’t comment.
I wonder Philip Giraldi would take the gig if it were offered. I doubt Bacevich would.
Greg Pandatshang
February 16, 2017 at 6:30 PM
Our alumnus Gucci Little Piggy was flagging him as bad news back in November, implied that his opinions were for sale.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/24/michael-flynns-consulting-firm-may-have-violated-federal-lobbying-law/
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/21/michael-flynn-flip-flopped-on-turkey-coup-attempt-in-recent-months-video/
Fiddlesticks
February 15, 2017 at 12:15 PM
“Our alumnus Gucci Little Piggy…”
That was a blogger who made good. Good thing he deep sixed his blog though.
Mike Street Station
February 16, 2017 at 5:22 AM
Are we really going to have to have a post on every one of these dust ups?
One of the many things to hate about Trump is how we are supposed to care about everyone of his petty fights. He is an outsider. He shoots from the hip. There are going to be mistakes. I really dont want to have to give my government this much attention.
Do it right first time, or do it wrong but dont expect supporters to wade in to support your decisions.
Lion of the Turambar
February 15, 2017 at 12:57 PM
Typical TruCon scum. Can’t see through his ideology to grasp what’s happening before his eyes. The world is moving headlong to a point and while Trump is not the whole of this he is at the front of it. The gray areas in the world are shrinking as all things sift into either black or white and this will continue until everyone has made their choice what side they’re on. No one can escape making this choice and no choice is still a choice.
Andrew E.
February 15, 2017 at 1:27 PM
Are we really going to have to have a post on every one of these dust ups?
Why not just ignore Trump, you opposed him. Without Trump we would have Hillary and the media and the Deep State would be making sure guys like you wouldn’t – “have to give my government this much attention.”
But some of us out here voted for Trump to go on the attack and fight for America against the media, deep state, globalists etc.
It’s warfare. The swamp is fighting back, no surprise.
Rifleman
February 15, 2017 at 2:28 PM
enjoy yourself engaging the battle on every Omorosa pronouncement
Lion o' the Turambar
February 15, 2017 at 6:41 PM
Flynn was the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency from 2012-14. Obama fired him in 2014 for mismanagement and abuse of staff.
Flynn setup a consulting and lobbying firm after is retirement from the military. His firm was hired by Turkey to lobby on behalf of the Erdogan government. Flynn received classified briefings as part of candidate Trumps team while still being employed by Turkey. People have raised conflict of interest questions about that.
In December 2015 Flynn attended a big dinner in Moscow for RT, formerly Russia Today, the Russian government owned English language news service. Vladimir Putin was the guest of honor at this dinner. Flynn also gave a paid talk while in Moscow and had made frequent appearances on RT as an expert commentator.
All of that must have made US intelligence suspicious of Flynn. Some people in intelligence felt Flynn ignored what his staff told him and acted on his gut feelings instead as director of DIA. This hardly is the kind of behavior you want in a national security advisor to the president. Some NSA officials leaked to the press that they were no longer sending their most secret intelligence to the white house because they assumed Flynn would pass it along to Russia.
I’m sure they had no hard evidence of that. They just didn’t like Flynn and didn’t feel they could trust him.
We have not seen the transcript of the Dec 29th call or any of his other calls to the Russian Ambassador. I’m sure there is no smoking gun there or we would have heard about it, but perhaps there was something about the conversation that gave intelligence agencies pause. I assume Flynn got a top level security clearance after the election to take this job. They must have reviewed all the RT and Turkey issues then and given him the clearance anyway.
Either Flynn was rubbing people in the intelligence community the wrong way after the inauguration or there is something more in the transcripts that we don’t know about.
mikeca
February 15, 2017 at 1:21 PM
Yes, there is no other possible explanation. We all know the intelligence community is a paragon of bipartisan virtue with zero agendas whatsoever outside of its core mission of protecting our freedoms as Americans. If the intelligence community leadership didn’t like Flynn, there is no doubt whatsoever that the root cause was Flynn’s own incompetence and questionable morality. To think otherwise is the impugn the complete, total and unquestionable goodness and impartiality of the intelligence community leadership. I’d sooner question the integrity of the Almighty himself.
Kaka
February 15, 2017 at 1:54 PM
What is this with the sudden leftist respect for the intelligence community? Have you missed the Jason Bourne movies? The Falcon and the Snowman? 3 Days of the Condor? The “Cocaine Importing Agency” blaming the drug epidemic on blacks? Pretty much every spy movie, every academic paper on manufacturing consent, the Vietnam debacle, the Bay of Pigs and Latin America, the entire history of leftism stands athwart the intelligence community.
Now, the left regards the IC as a paragon of professional virtue, whose every pronouncement is unimpeachable in its concern for American interests and freedoms.
I guess the IC is now very converged with SJWism that the left now trusts it.
What is astonishing is how none of these idiots realize that Trump is setting conditions for a soft military coup against these very agencies.
map
February 15, 2017 at 11:59 PM
The sense I got is that Mike Pence was mad about how he felt Flynn lied to him. Flynn wasn’t a team player. The points about him being kooky and a lobbyist for Erdoğan are on the mark too. It probably is as simple as that. The problem is that he was undone by US intelligence agencies leaking classified information, and the media is trying to amp up the Trump-is-a-KGB-agent narrative again.
All-in-all, firing him may have been a managerial victory for Trump, but a major PR loss. Time will tell if it was worth it.
Sid
February 15, 2017 at 1:49 PM
It’s not a PR loss because Trumps base of supporters don’t care about the wonkish issues that may get political appointments in trouble with the Washington establishment.
The peasants don’t care about the rules of the Court.
What none of these people realize is that they are messing with a president who holds overwhelming popular support among the trigger-pullers in the military and their commanding officers, something that no Democrat president has held since Roosevelt.
map
February 16, 2017 at 12:02 AM
Don’t really know what’s going on here. It does seem odd that Flynn was let go less than a month into the job. If he had problems, were they not known prior to his appointment? If not, why not? The Saker takes a dim view of the whole affair:
As I said, it’s over. Not because of Flynn’s views on Iran or Islam. But because Trump has caved in, he has been broken and now all that’s left is a painful 4 year long agony. That’s assuming that the Neocons don’t impeach him just to bask in their arrogance and sense of supremacy.
Frankly, my heart goes out to all those who sincerely hoped that Trump will be the man to free the US from the Neocons and restore the power of the “basket of deplorables” over the many minorities and special interests. Some will now indulge in a lot of “I told you so” but they will be wrong. To hope for the best was the right thing to do. Those who voted for Trump did the only thing in their power to prevent Hillary from occupying the White House. That was the right decision, they did the right thing, both morally and pragmatically.
…
True? Who knows? Time will tell..
Black Death
February 15, 2017 at 2:00 PM
Despair cucks the lot of them. Cowardice is as punishable a crime just as any.
Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog
February 15, 2017 at 2:40 PM
The Saker’s take is an hysterical overreaction. That said, what Flynn’s removal means is that stories about “the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia” can’t be dismissed as a nothingburger anymore. Because of them the National Security Adviser lost his job! The media harping on Russia all the time probably wasn’t doing a lot of damage until now because most voters were assuming the claims of Russian infiltration of Trump’s team to be partisan nonsense, but the Flynn matter unfortunately puts some smoke in the air.
Richard
February 15, 2017 at 2:49 PM
Here’s what I said on your post about DeVos from 2 weeks ago:
Now CNN’s reporting the Pudzer nomination is dead. Like Flynn, I think his was a nomination that was ill-advised in the first place, but that’s not what’s important. The gazelle’s wounded, the hyenas smell blood, and it can’t outrun them anymore.
Every Trump initiative, from good (addressing immigration) to unimportant (rapprochement with Russia) to bad (replace Obamacare with Libertariancare) is dead in the water. For example, the “muh free trade” shitbirds have taken the opportunity to kill even the mildest, most free-market libertarian-approved proposal to preserve good-paying blue-collar jobs.
I get a lot of flak for being a “defeatist” or “concern troll,” and I admit I’ve been too quick to predict doom for Trump on a number of occasions, but this really does feel like a low moment where there isn’t a clear path to recovery.
snorlaxwp
February 15, 2017 at 3:05 PM
Excellent post. Yes he always seemed high strung and nutty.. and not that bright. And that is why am glad that Trump did not pick him to be his running mate. I do not think Pence is that smart either but he at least has good instincts and makes up for his shortcomings by having good gravitas (again unlike Flynn).
Abe
February 15, 2017 at 4:29 PM
Pence has gravitas, something that Flynn lacks. Pence did very well in the one debate. He has been loyal to Trump. Very good pick.
The only danger with Pence is that people think he’s the natural successor in 2024.
Lion of the Blogosphere
February 15, 2017 at 4:34 PM
Trump had lunch with Christie this week. You think there’s a chance he might replace Priebus with Christie?
David Pinsen
February 15, 2017 at 6:08 PM
No chance.
Lion of the Blogosphere
February 15, 2017 at 7:57 PM
What did happen to Christie and Giuliani? They seemed like long-time loyalists, but there were no Administration positions for either. Is it possible that DT is saving one or both of them for Special Prosecutor jobs?
SteveRogers42
February 16, 2017 at 12:14 AM
I would find it odd if a man with an IQ of 120 would be able to become a General without affirmative action. Most of the senior enlisted men I knew were around that range.
apothecary
February 15, 2017 at 11:28 PM
[…] penny-ante stuff; so much so you have to wonder—as some commentators have wondered—whether Trump used the whole nothingburger as an excuse to dump Flynn this week […]
The Spooks And The Hacks: Why Do They Hate Russia?
February 18, 2017 at 11:30 PM