On February 13 2017 is when National security adviser Michael Flynn had resigned after it was revealed that he had misled Vice President Mike Pence and other top White House officials about his conversations with the Russian ambassador to the United States. This is a quite controversial topic when it was fairly new and the opposing sides had very different views points on the current situation. We have some people thinking that there was a liberal witch hunt trying to hurt and damage the Trump administration, we have others thinking that Michael Flynn is a genuine American hero. We have both oppositions claiming to know how each other are thinking and I am going to show why each side has their own specific opinions about the other.
The Michael Flynn situation with Russia and the Trump administration is seen as almost blasphemy to the liberals due to him have so called “connections” with the Russians. Mr. Flynn, who served in the job for less than a month, said he had given “incomplete information” regarding a telephone call he had with the ambassador in late December about American sanctions against Russia, weeks before President Trump’s inauguration. The liberals had also gone after him after not knowing that they had kept Vice President Mike Pence out of the loop on the information.
Many journalists on the right are saying that what Michael Flynn did was not bad and that he is somewhat seen as a hero. They go on to say and to call out the left side for supposedly not letting the situation go and trying to hurt the Trump administration. One journalist in particular in a Fox News Article By Seam Hannity, “Sean Hannity: Flynn first victim of liberal, anti-Trump witch hunt,” in this Sean Hannity is quoted that saying “But there’s something much bigger and darker going on here. The alt-radical left has a master plan to damage and destroy President Trump, and as collateral damage, anyone connected to him. This is about the left’s willingness to do anything to stop President Trump from draining the swamp and changing the status quo in Washington.” Looking at this I was quiet confused with these claims but with someone like Sean Hannity I can see where he is somewhat coming from how he views the left as some radical party trying to take down the so called “swamp” in the white house. He continues on saying that the “alt left” is not only going after Michael Flynn but many more people that are connected with trump and the white house. For example, I have a quote from him explaining this, “The alt-radical left is hell-bent on annihilating everybody around the president, from top advisers like Kellyanne Conway, Steve Bannon, Reince Priebus, Stephen Miller, Sean Spicer and Sebastian Gorka, to even the president’s own children, including his 10-year-old son.” Giving him the benefit of the doubt I can see where he is going when he says that they are trying to get rid of Sean Spicer and Steve Bannon but im not really too sure on why he thinks that the Left are trying to annihilate Trumps 10-year-old son. With giving him the benefit of the doubt I can see that he is trying to claim that the left is trying to destroy the trump campaign and is trying to get rid of everyone that has any connection with trump. He goes on to support his claims to his argument with quotes from reporters on the left side, an example being from Joe Scarborough from MSNBC, “So Stephen Miller, let’s take you to class for a second here, because I know you didn’t go to law school,” MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough said Monday. “You’re not worthy to be in the White House, you’re unworthy to be in government if that’s what you believe, unless it’s Vladimir Putin’s government.” The way he uses this quote and this claim only supports his argument more so. Reading this if I had no knowledge on the situation as a whole and wanted to learn about it, this article would be pretty convincing at targeting the left and putting the blame on the liberal witch hunt that is supposedly going on during these times. Sean Hannity knows who he is writing to, it’s quite funny in my opinion as the comments are riddled with “ Obama was a radical terrorist”. He most certainly knew who he was writing to and that being said his article would be very convincing if you were to read it from their point of view. This is how the right views it and I can understand where they come from in most of their arguments if given the benefit of the doubt.
In one article from the left I noticed that they went on to satirize the right side. In an article by Jacob Brogan called, “Today in Conservative Media: Mike Flynn, “Genuine American Hero”. In this article the left is mainly arguing why what Michael Flynn had done was wrong with the situation of Russia and the Trump campaign. They went on to say “” But the piece went on to argue that the sanctions supposedly under discussion were “largely bogus,” since the Obama administration had imposed them “to substantiate the Democratic Party’s sore-loser conspiracy theory that Russia was responsible for electing Donald Trump.” Here they are saying that the right thinks that they are going after Flynn because they lost the election and that they are sore losers. The left also mentions how the right media tries to play off the whole situation of Michael Flynn with Russia. They quote The Daily Caller, a supposedly right wing media source and they take an example from their news piece and satirize it. That quote being, “The Daily Caller ran a short post inquiring as to whether Flynn deserved to be fired, quickly concluding that “either way, he is still a genuine American hero, whose ideas are worth listening to” before presenting a four-paragraph promotional description of Flynn’s recent book, The Field of Fight.”, I can understand how they satirize it because they continue to go on and just speak about how they are leading away from the whole Russian part with Michael Flynn and go on to speak about his book and how he is still credible after not informing about speaking with the Russians. They say that The Daily Caller spoke about why he was fired but ended that fairly quickly to promote his book. I can see what he is pointing out in the right wing media and how it is wrong in his views. He then continues on saying how the right media began to look for replacements and completely going over the fact that Flynn had done something wrong in the first place, “Conservative outlets soon turned to speculation about Flynn’s possible replacement, often focusing on the military titles of various candidates. “Trump Eyes Two Generals, an Admiral to Replace Flynn,” a LifeZette headline read, while the Daily Caller reported, “President Donald Trump is considering three former high ranking military officials for the post of National Security Advisor.” This helps his argument tremendously in how this is worded. I can see where he is going with this piece. He knows who he is writing to and that is shown in the way he is presenting his information. He puts it in sort of a mocking way and he is satirizing it.
Overall I had thought that I didn’t really have a position on this certain topic but it came to me that I am more left sided on this particular topic. I noticed that when the right wings media began to claim absurd things like the witch hunting liberals wanting to annihilate trumps 10-year-old son. I found that quite compelling and confusing. The more I read into it the clearer it became to me that they were attacking the left and not really showing evidence supporting their claims and accusations.