Asked If He Thinks Flynn Broke Law, Spicer Says That’s ‘A Question For Him’

A new website that the White House has launched on President Donald Trump's first 100 days is displayed in front of White House press secretary Sean Spicer as he speaks to the media during the daily press briefing at the White House, Tuesday, April 25, 2017, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
A new website that the White House has launched on President Donald Trump's first 100 days is displayed in front of White House press secretary Sean Spicer as he speaks to the media during the daily press briefing at... A new website that the White House has launched on President Donald Trump's first 100 days is displayed in front of White House press secretary Sean Spicer as he speaks to the media during the daily press briefing at the White House in Washington Tuesday, April 25, 2017. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Asked Tuesday if former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn may have broken the law by failing to disclose information on his security clearance application, White House press secretary Sean Spicer dodged.

“That would be a question for him,” Spicer said at the daily press briefing.
“I don’t know what he filled out or what he did or did not do.”

The bipartisan leaders of the House Oversight Committee announced Tuesday that there was “no evidence” that Flynn made the appropriate disclosures about payments he accepted from foreign governments, which he is forbidden from accepting as a former military officer. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) said Flynn failed to note the $45,000 he was paid by Russian state media outlet RT to give a speech in Moscow in 2015 on his January 2016 security clearance application.

Spicer argued that Flynn filled out that form during the Obama administration, and brushed aside questions about the White House refusing the committee’s request for any documents “referring or relating to Lieutenant General Flynn’s contacts with foreign nationals.”

Spicer’s argument was three-pronged. One, the Department of Defense also received a request for some of those documents and complied. Two, Flynn’s communications simply amounted to too much information for the White House to sift through. And three, the Trump team wasn’t aware of Flynn’s activities prior to Inauguration Day, though he served as a top campaign adviser and was a named national security adviser for the administration at the time.

“To say we want the national security adviser, whose job it is to talk with foreign counterparts on a daily basis, to document every call he may or may not have made is not a request that is able to be filled,” Spicer said, calling the request “outlandish.”

Journalists pointed out that all of Flynn’s calls were made as a representative of Trump, and that it was the transition team’s responsibility to properly investigate the background of an individual who would have access to the nation’s highest-level intelligence secrets.

“Why wasn’t he more closely vetted during the transition period?” one reporter asked.

“You fill out the forms and do a background check,” Spicer responded. “And they have a security clearance and fill it out and that’s how everyone operates under the same guise.”

As CNN reported, former government officials like Flynn would be asked to re-apply for national security clearances when they return to public service, and would have to detail any payments received by foreign governments.

Latest Livewire
20
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for sjk sjk says:

    Extreme vetting begins at home!

  2. So how long until subpoenas are issued? They can’t stall this forever. Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.

  3. Avatar for krux krux says:

    Soooo much absurdity, so little time.

    ETA some highlights from this round:

    “That would be a question for him,” (the decision of illegality is always left to the perp)

    “too much information for the White House to sift through” (always the deciding factor in whether information is important)

    “to document every call he may or may not have made” is “outlandish” (this administration’s approach to diplomacy)

    Clearly these are just scratching the surface here. This whole line of answers was nothing but ridiculous.

  4. I don’t have a law degree, but I’m pretty sure obstructing congressional proceedings is a crime…

    They might want to start talking to some real lawyers not named Michael Cohen soon.

  5. SPICEY INNA HOUSE!

    We’re not responsible for Flynn cause we weren’t in the White House then!

    SPICEY’S GOTTA TAKE A BIG BOY NAP NOW!

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

14 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for lestatdelc Avatar for ghost Avatar for fargo116 Avatar for epicurus Avatar for becca656 Avatar for inlabsitrust Avatar for korvu Avatar for lastroth Avatar for cd Avatar for boidster Avatar for dickweed Avatar for khaaannn Avatar for sjk Avatar for henk Avatar for katscherger Avatar for lilyinindy Avatar for krux Avatar for drtv Avatar for bluefalcon

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: