Yesterday it was just a “clarification,” ABC said. Now it’s a “serious error”https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/937089913899618304 …
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Agreed. Genuinely agree 100%. But Flynn has said that he is now fully cooperating with the Mueller investigation. It seems as if this error from ABC (which was real and serious) is overwhelming a different, yet perhaps even more significant story.
And the stock market dropping 400 points? Does that count? A blatant lie? Does that count? Lying to the American public b/c they think we're stupid? Does that count?
Yes, but we know Flynn WENT to Russia and met Putin while working for candidate Trump. We’re supposed to believe that there was no communication through Flynn? Don’t be surprised if when this is all said and done the report is proven to be right, even by accident
And why does the correction include the spin from a Trump “confidant” that the communication was to talk about working together on Syria when we know he was directed to talk about the U.N. vote and sanctions?
In the rush to be ‘fair’, the MSM might be shooting itself in the foot and doing work for Trump by overcompensating in their reaction to a misstatement that didn’t even register to me because we all knew the subject was calls to Kislyak during the transition.
If Flynn is willing to testify that Trump told him to contact the Russians *to negotiate sanctions and the U.N. Vote* that’s actually WORSE then the generic “candidate Trump” claim. If the candidate gave that order what was the context? Let’s not get lazy this close to the finish
Noted. And we know this kind of mistake can happen. Ask Peter Arnett. Back to journalism at a crucial time, please .
Noted now back to the real blockbuster of a former National Security Advisor being a now convicted felon. Ross is suspended temporarily, Flynn is now forever a felon. This should be focus on political press although media press should report in it but it's a blip on radar.
A flick of the pen and he is no longer a felon.
Not according to the courts. They have to determine that nit the executive branch.
Pardon? Pardon
See the federal court’s reaction to the Arpaio pardon. They’ve refused to remove the convictions from public records.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/26/us/politics/trump-pardon-joe-arpaio-constitution.html?referer= … A Federal district judge last week dismissed the criminal case against former Sheriff Joe Arpaio
The federal courts have chosen not to remove the conviction. The case is dismissed but the conviction remains.
There's more to this. The difference is just not that significant. If you suspended him for this you need to revisit your management skills.
He is still talking about Trump. Don’t understand the big deal. Looks like an honest mistake. Don’t know why they suspended him.
I was promised collusion and all I got was proper action by the incoming administration! #resist
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.