On February 13th, General Michael Flynn (Ret.) resigned as President Trump’s National Security Adviser.
He has since been replaced by Lt. General H.R. McMaster (U.S. Army). Opinion about the relative comparisons between the two Advisers has been varied, but mostly positive.
What bothers me, though, is not the merits of each man, but the manner in which General Flynn’s resignation came about.
On December 29th, the Obama administration announced new sanctions against Russia over alleged Russian interference in the November election of Donald Trump to the presidency. Later that day, General Flynn, the top National Security Adviser to President-Elect Trump, initiated a phone call to the Russian Ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak.
The FBI tapped into the call – supposedly not because of Flynn, but to keep tabs on the ambassador. For some unexplained reason, after recording the call, the FBI informed the Obama White House.
Two weeks later, on January 12th, a columnist for The Washington Post reported on that call, attributing his knowledge to “a senior U.S. government official.”
The media began to speculate that General Flynn had broken the Logan Act. That law forbids private citizens from negotiating with a foreign government regarding any dispute with the United States. Passed in 1799, the law has never been successfully prosecuted in its 218-year history.
The Logan Act does not prohibit members of an incoming administration from communicating with a foreign government.
Such calls have been routine for the last hundred years. It was not an attempt at negotiation. It was simply communication between two officials who may deal extensively with each other in the future.
Flynn later told administration officials, including Vice President Pence, that he and the Ambassador never discussed sanctions.
When the Vice President said this on television, “unnamed” government officials with access to classified materials, struck again.
They leaked to the press that the call had been intercepted and that Flynn and the ambassador had, indeed, discussed sanctions.
On February 13th, President Trump asked General Flynn for his resignation. White House spokesman Sean Spicer explained that it was not because Flynn had broken any laws, but because by “lying” to the Vice President and others, he lost credibility with the President. Spicer said, “What this came down to was a matter of trust.”
Indeed, for Flynn to have broken the law, he would have had to negotiate with the Russians, which he did not.
The New York Times ran a major story on the subject, using seven of their top reporters. But they buried the lead – or the most important element of the story.
Deep in the article, they included this key paragraph: “Obama officials asked the FBI if a quid pro quo had been discussed on the call, and the answer came back no, according to one of the officials, who like others asked not to be named discussing delicate communications.
The topic of sanctions came up, they were told, but there was no deal.” This point is crucial. It confirms that Flynn did not break the law.
Further, the New York Times article claimed that FBI agents brought Flynn in and “he was grilled about a phone call he had with Russia’s ambassador.”
It’s interesting that the FBI would do this, since by that time they had the transcript of the call and they knew — as they told the White House — that no “quid pro quo had been discussed on the call” and that “the topic of sanctions came up, but there was no deal.”
In other words, the FBI questioned General Flynn even though they already knew that no law had been broken. Then they mysteriously reported the phone call (in which no law was broken) to the White House, but they informed the White House that no law had been broken.
But “a senior U.S. government official” (probably inside the Obama White House) chose to leak the confidential information to The Washington Post. The media then stirred the imaginary flames until the heat spurred the President to ask for his adviser’s resignation.
I assume pro-Islamist advocates inside the Cabinet departments and Obama’s shadow government are breathing a sigh of relief today. Let’s hope that relief is short-lived.
What is obviously disturbing, though, is that some members of the Justice Department and the White House used their positions in a clearly partisan effort to undermine the new Administration. This level of partisanship is toxic — not just to the new President, but to the Presidency itself and to the nation.
Unfortunately, all of this is part of an alarming worldwide pattern.
What’s happening in Washington, D.C., is not unique. Upheaval and unrest also fill many other capitals of the world’s democracies.
The president of South Korea has had to step aside and place her presidency in the hands of a caretaker president. She is accused of influence peddling and awaits impeachment charges. And this comes at a time when North Korea’s lunatic leader is making huge strides in ballistic missile development. And stocking up on nuclear weapons.
Brazil’s president has just been impeached and removed from office.
In Israel, the leftist media has accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of abuse of power (again). Even the police are investigating the charges. I doubt it will bring him down, but it is definitely hurting the nation.
The nations of Europe remain deeply divided over issues like globalism (Brexit in Britain and exit rumblings in several other EU nations) and immigration (Germany’s Merkel will probably be ousted from office, Geert Wilders is facing new attacks by the government in The Netherlands, and Sweden is on fire — just like President Trump noted).
What’s happening to the world’s democracies?
In almost every case, the turmoil can be traced to a
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)
The Apostle Paul warned that “in the last days perilous times will come.” (2 Timothy 3:1 NKJV) In the verses that follow, he describes the things that will make those last days perilous.
It’s interesting that Paul doesn’t focus on natural disasters or international events such as war. Instead, he describes individuals and the character and attitudes prevalent among people living in the last days.
This passage makes it clear that the great perils of the last days concern people and their loss of moral standards.
Paul begins telling us why the last days will be dangerous with the phrase, “For (or “because”) men will be lovers of self….” (2 Timothy 3:2 NASB)
That’s only the first characteristic listed, but when the Bible gives a list, it usually begins with the most important item. In this case, “…lovers of self….” is the root of all that follows.
A new book that’s soon to be released seems to confirm Paul’s prediction. The Confessions of Congressman X is an insider’s account of the corruption festering in the Congress of the United States. The Congressman-author remains anonymous, but the authenticity of the book is apparently unchallenged.
This is what he had to say in the book: (Empahsis in bold mine -Watchman Media)
- “Most of my colleagues are dishonest career politicians who revel in the power and special-interest money that’s lavished upon them.”
- “My main job is to keep my job, to get reelected. It takes precedence over everything.”
- “Fundraising is so time consuming I seldom read any bills I vote on. Like many of my colleagues, I don’t know how the legislation will be implemented, or what it’ll cost.”
- “We spend money we don’t have and blithely mortgage the future with a wink and a nod. Screw the next generation. It’s about getting credit now, lookin’ good for the upcoming election.”
As for the voters, he explains:
- “The average man on the street actually thinks he influences how I vote. Unless it’s a hot-button issue, his thoughts are generally meaningless. I’ll politely listen, but I follow the money.”
- “Voters are incredibly ignorant and know little about our form of government and how it works.”
- “It’s far easier than you think to manipulate a nation of naive, self-absorbed sheep who crave instant gratification.”
Amber Phillips of The Washington Post believes that the author is “a moderate Democrat with some seniority.”
Some of the Congressman’s statements are extremely disturbing, but, unfortunately, confirm the fears of many Americans. They also confirm the Apostle Paul’s assertion that in the last days “…men will be lovers of self….”
I’m very certain that the Congressman’s words do not describe every member of Congress. But I fear they describe far too many of them.
Of course, Paul’s list continues and introduces many more dangers that we see in our world. But his opening sentence sounded familiar: “In the last days… men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant….” I think I could paraphrase that as “Washington, Washington, Washington!”
As I said a couple of weeks ago, the War for America has just begun. I think one of the most critical players in the war will be the media.
The idea of “fake news” is real, folks. The problem is, it’s the mainstream media that is faking the news. They feel they can do so because they have a monopoly on communication and the public will never know they have concocted stories.
Recently, the Associated Press (AP) reported that Department of Homeland Security (DHS) chief John Kelly had issued a memo calling for the use of the National Guard for immigration enforcement.
Other major outlets took that story and added to it. Some even specified that 100,000 troops would be marshaled for the immigration push. Some mainstream outlets implied that President Trump had already issued the order.
The truth? An underling at DHS had proposed that possibility. That proposal never made it out of his department. It never reached Secretary Kelly’s desk, much less was ever even sent to the White House. And, no number was even mentioned in the proposal’s only draft.
So the existence of an order by the President, a memo issued by Secretary Kelly, and a specific number of troops involved were all concocted by the Associated Press — and published without question by some of the nation’s most respected mainstream news organizations.
If that ain’t “fake news,” I’m not sure what is. Remember what your mother used to tell you? “When you point a finger at someone else, there are three fingers pointing back at you!”
The last days have truly come to America.
Finally, we’ve all heard about folks who are “so heavenly-minded they’re of no earthly good.” Personally, I don’t think that’s too much of a problem today. Instead, I think that most people are so earthly-minded that they’re of no heavenly good!
I believe that the more a Christian truly understands about his or her future destiny and the wonders God has in store for them, the more enthusiastically they will be able to live in this world.
In an effort to win converts to Christ, I think some Christians have overemphasized the immediate benefits of salvation. I agree that it’s important to know that Christ gives us pardon and peace and purpose in this life, but I also believe that we need to see our lives on earth in the proper context. And the context of life is eternity.
This week, I am going to share with you a brief overview of what that eternity holds in store for those of us who have accepted Christ’s pardon for our sins and received the promise of eternal happiness that comes with it.
And it’s not “fake news!” It’s breathtaking and it’s real! You have the word of Jesus Christ Himself on it!
© Copyright 2017 Hallindsey.com
Photo courtesy: Before Its News.com