Phil1111

Yeah, its spelt P..A..N..A..M..A.., B..A..H..A..M..A..S..

Kushners Set to Get $400 Million From Chinese Firm on Tower A company owned by the family of Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, stands to receive more than $400 million from a prominent Chinese company that is investing in the Kushners’ marquee Manhattan office tower at 666 Fifth Ave. The planned $4-billion transaction includes terms that some real estate experts consider unusually favorable for the Kushners. It provides them with both a sizable cash payout from Anbang Insurance Group for a property that has struggled financially and an equity stake in a new partnership. The details of the agreement, which is being circulated to attract additional investors, were shared with Bloomberg. It would make business partners of Kushner Cos. and Anbang, whose murky links to the Chinese power structure have raised national security concerns over its U.S. investments. In the process, an existing mortgage owed by the Kushners will be slashed to about a fifth of its current amount. The deal would value the 41-story tower at $2.85 billion, the most ever for a single Manhattan building: $1.6 billion for the office section and $1.25 billion for the retail section. The new partnership will refinance $1.15 billion in existing mortgage debt. "This is a huge, huge exit strategy for an office building," said Joshua Stein, a New York real estate lawyer. "It does sound like a home run of a transaction for Kushner and his group.” "At the very least, this raises serious questions about the appearance of a conflict that arises from the possibility that the Kushners are getting a sweetheart deal," said Larry Noble, general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center. "A classic way you influence people is by financially helping their family." The transaction would allow the Kushner Cos.’ investment in the tower to be salvaged by lenders and businesses that could have extensive dealings with the federal government, while also permitting the Kushners to buy back into the building’s more lucrative retail spaces and maintain a 20 percent stake. The deal would allow Vornado Realty Trust -- which is partnered with Trump in his two most valuable properties -- to exit a troubled asset with a 10-fold payout on its stake in the building’s offices and a doubling of its investment in its stores. It declined to discuss the deal." https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-13/kushners-set-to-get-400-million-from-chinese-on-marquee-tower

Thats a very good point. I wonder if the AARP has heard of this yet. They will not be happy when they find out that trump and the republicans want to put them out of business.

The article would have one believing it has been in continuous production for 60 years. Not true. Production stopped in 1986, then resumed in 1996. And reading about mid-air refueling of a 172 was news to me! It sort of references that "The only time its production ceased for an extended time was in the late 1980s, when stricter US laws restricted the manufacture of all light aircraft." But it is a great design. manual flaps, "omni-vision" and a swept tail were the only changes. The swept tail does look better and the omni-vision is nicer. Other than it heats the cabin up quicker in the summer. The electric flaps are not a improvement. The Flight Design would be an improvement IMO. http://flightdesign.com/wordpress/?page_id=36 ...............C-172.....................C4...................c-182 Engine,..........145.................180....................230 hp Useful load.....918 lb................1320..................1142 Stall.............50kn....................48....................49 cruise...........124kn..................160kn...............145 range...........640nm.................1200.................915 seats.............4........................4.....................4 Fuel GPH........8.4.....................8.4..................13.8 Construction...Al......................Carbon............... Al http://cessna.txtav.com/en/piston/cessna-skyhawk#_model-specs http://cessna.txtav.com/en/piston/cessna-skylane#_model-specs Flight Design has built 1700 two place carbon, certified aircraft.

A good read: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170302-the-plane-so-good-its-still-in-production-after-60-years And for $20K(perhaps) http://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1442631/1956-cessna-172-skyhawk Or 400K new http://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/17460455/2017-cessna-172s-skyhawk-sp

I don't see where he said anything about prioritizing healthcare over food and shelter, but nevertheless, his comments were incredibly dumb, and his twisting of scripture to somehow validate his baseless argument is just sickening. He said those on medicaid probably do the least in terms of preventative medicine, but doesn't provide anything to back up his claim. Even if it were true, it doesn't mean that they aren't doing anything. So what, just because they aren't maximizing the benefits to the fullest, we should just take them away altogether? I'm having a hard time understanding the relevance of his comments aside from getting attention. On another note, Rep. Jason Chaffetz has been getting a lot of negative press for his comments as well: Obama said something similar: “ if you looked at that person’s budget and you looked at their cable bill, their telephone … cell phone bill, other things that they’re spending on, it may turn out that they just haven’t prioritized health care because right now everybody is healthy, nobody actually wants to spend money on health insurance until they get sick." In trump's defense he had allot of republicans echoing the exact same sentiment. It has to be mandatory...gggggggggggrrrrrrrr... "In 2012, 12.6 percent of motorists, or about one in eight drivers, was uninsured, according to a 2014 study by the Insurance Research Council (IRC). The percentage has been declining in recent years. Oklahoma had the highest percentage of uninsured motorists, 26 percent, and Massachusetts had the lowest, 4 percent." Otherwise the sick will go to ER and get a free ride on the insured. Just like an uninsured motorist that hits a pedestrian and causes serious injury. http://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/uninsured-motorists

Trump and the Parasitic Presidency March 13, 2017, 3:07pm Charles M. Blow – The New York Times. We have now passed the 50-day mark of the Donald Trump administration and one thing is clear: There is no new Trump. There is only the same old Trump: Dangerous and unpredictable, gauche and greedy, temperamentally unsuited and emotionally unsound. If you were trying to create in a lab a person with character traits more unbecoming in a president, it would be hard to outdo the one we have. He continues to have explosive Twitter episodes — presumably in response to some news he finds unflattering or some conspiracy floated by fringe outlets — that make him look not only foolish, but unhinged. Indeed, a USA TODAY/Suffolk University poll published last week found: “By 2-1, those surveyed disapprove of Trump’s temperament, a much more negative rating than he gets for his policy positions. Six in 10, including 40 percent of Republicans, complain that he tweets too much.” In these fits of rage, he generates a lie or repeats one, which shifts the burden of proof to the legitimate media to swat it down and defend the truth. This exercise is already getting old. Trump’s assaults on the truth are not benign. Presidential credibility is American credibility. There is no way to burn through one without burning through the other. And when he’s not making explosive charges, he’s taking destructive actions. He has signed a slew of executive actions to demonstrate his power and signal his administrative direction. As Business Insider pointed out, as of March 6, “The 45th president has signed 34 executive actions so far, with far-reaching effects on Americans’ lives.” These included “16 executive orders in 45 days.” In addition, federal agencies and the Republican-controlled Congress have “delayed, suspended or reversed” more than 90 regulations in the short time since President Trump took office, according to a tally by The New York Times. The Times’s report continued: “The emerging effort — dozens more rules could be eliminated in the coming weeks — is one of the most significant shifts in regulatory policy in recent decades. It is the leading edge of what Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist, described late last month as ‘the deconstruction of the administrative state.’” Now, Trump and congressional Republicans have locked arms in an effort to ram through a disastrous Obamacare repeal-and-replace plan — attempting to cast doubt on the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office in the process — that promises to be a boon to insurers and the rich and a bane to the poor and the elderly. Trumpcare would likely not only be more expensive and cover fewer people, but some people currently in need of care to extend their lives would no longer get it. Put quite simply: This plan is not only bad, it could be deadly. Add to these destructive policies the fact that this president and his family are burning through taxpayer funds like it’s Monopoly money. As The Hill reported on Saturday, “President Trump paid a visit to one of his golf courses again Saturday, marking apparently his ninth visit to a golf course in the seven weeks since he took office.” The site pointed out, “Trump has made several weekend trips to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., as well, calling the property the ‘Winter White House.’ ” In February, numerous media outlets pointed out that Trump was spending on travel in a month nearly as much as what the Obamas spent in a year. This doesn’t even include the travel and security costs of Trump’s children or the cost of Trump’s wife and son remaining in Trump Tower in New York, at least for now, which is estimated to cost taxpayers hundreds of thousand of dollars a day. This was particularly jarring because Trump had been a chief critic of the amount of money the Obamas spent on vacations. Indeed, Trump tweeted in 2012: “President @BarackObama’s vacation is costing taxpayers millions of dollars — Unbelievable!” No, what is unbelievable is the staggering nature of the hypocrisy of Trump and his current spending and the near silence of Obama’s conservative critics. Trump appears to view the Treasury as a personal piggy bank and the presidency as a part-time job. I think any who have been holding out hope that Trump will eventually change into someone more polished, professional and amenable than the man we have come to know must simply abandon that hope. This is a 70-year-old man who has lived his entire life as the vile, dishonest, incurious creature who got elected. That election validated his impulses rather than served as a curb on them. Trump will continue to debase and devalue the presidency with his lies. Trump will continue to follow Bannon’s philosophy of internal deconstruction of our government, its principles and its institutions. And Trump will continue to leech as much personal financial advantage as he can from the flesh of the American public. That’s who Trump is. America elected a parasite.

'Trump Slump' Could Mean Well Over $10 Billion Per Year in Lost Tourism Revenues The rise of Trump, and specifically his policies on immigration and the Muslim ban, appears to be causing some foreign tourists to rethink plans to visit the U.S. Search engines reported a steep decline in international travelers looking for flights to America immediately after Trump issued a controversial order banning refugees and immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries in early 2017. Many overseas-based tour operaters noticed a sharp dip in bookings to the U.S. around this time as well. A large slump in international travelers would cause harm to America's tourism industry, and its economy in general. "Closing borders risks jobs," said David Scowsili, president and CEO of the World Travel & Tourism Council, a private industry group, in a speech directed at the administration in mid-February. "The livelihood of millions of Americans depends on people being able to use planes, trains and automobiles to spend their tourist dollars."... How big could the falloff in international travelers truly be? On Tuesday, the New York Times cited a forecast from the international firm Tourism Economics stating that the number of foreign travelers in the U.S. could drop by 6.3 million annually due to Trump rhetoric and policies. America welcomed about 77 million international visitors in 2016, so that would mean a decrease of 8.2%. What could such a drop mean in terms of dollars? According to U.S. Travel Association data for 2015, "each overseas traveler spends approximately $4,400 when they visit the U.S. and stays an average of 18 nights." A more recent estimate from the Global Business Travel Association holds that "each overseas traveler spends approximately $5,000 when they visit" the U.S. Multiply that spending by a theoretical decline of 6.3 million foreign visitors, and what you get is a potential loss of $27 billion to $31.5 billion annually. That would be a devastating slump indeed." http://time.com/money/4687114/trump-slump-foreign-tourism-us-immigration-travel/

Can you provide supporting citations for the three allegations please? Thanks. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-11/trump-fires-wall-street-enforcer-bharara-who-refused-to-resign http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/donald-trump-2016-russian-ties-214116 http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/22/u-s-prosecutors-are-out-to-crack-russia-s-crooked-money-machine.html https://www.buzzfeed.com/matthewzeitlin/russian-money-laundering-case-in-new-york-court-could-be-del?utm_term=.qeXDaKP8V#.hsEALGdW4 http://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/fired-u-s-attorney-was-probing-whether-fox-illegally-obtained-journalists-phone-records-report-says/ Thanks for that: Here is the answer. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-trump-ethics-lawsuit-idUSKBN15701V

A consensus of scientists support the findings pointing to man-made global warming, the industries providing donations to politicians denying it are found to be misleading the public. What the fuck else do people want? This really is becoming a Baghdad Bob/Comical Ali thing where there are tanks and smoke in the background and people still think it's not true. Except for climate change deniers. Yeah the whole wiretap walk-back yesterday, microwave spying, etc. The whole world looks on with horror, disgust and amusement. Just like 55-60% of Americans today. Rising to 80% by the end of this year.

Fiscally conservative can be seen a couple ways. Paying for the shit that you spend is also another way to be fiscally conservative. 'reducing' the deficit' can be done by raising taxes and cutting spending. Then everyone shares in the pain of electing the assholes that spend the money recklessly. I still share all the frustrations with it all, but I am more of the camp that yes, it actually costs money to run the country. big deal. jack up the taxes, deliver the services, show people where their money is actually going, and then we will get real spending reform when people see what things really cost. How about a monthly tax bill showing line items of where the dollars go. We would see real change. Agree, but add no bs accounting. The CBO growth and actual GDP numbers are used. Not the ones dreamed up by politician-liars-dreamers. The easiest budget to pass is one that fabricates growth numbers. Then uses high numbers to kick tough decisions down the road.

The Wall Street Journal reported today that “a 62-year-old currently earning about $18,000 a year could pay nearly $20,000 annually to get health-insurance coverage under the House GOP plan — compared with about $760 a year that person would owe toward premiums under the ACA.”... Promising people the moon when it comes to health care is, to put it mildly, stupid. The GOP knows this, given the fact that it reaped substantial political rewards from attacking Democrats on their unmet health care promises. But Republican leaders now find themselves caught between their campaign pledges to eliminate the Affordable Care Act, the expectation to maintain the ACA’s insurance coverage gains, and the difficulty of crafting legislation that can actually pass Congress. The Congressional Budget Office report makes clear how aggressively mendacious the Republicans’ health care strategy is. It also showed that the American Health Care Act is an absurd and dreadful piece of legislation that cannot, by any reasonable standard, be called a “replacement” for the Affordable Care Act. http://www.salon.com/2017/03/13/cbo-blows-up-trumpcare-gops-health-care-plan-will-leave-tens-of-millions-uninsured/

In 1945 the International Flying Farmers association was formed as a means for farmers with aircraft to socialize. Usually by getting together at fly-ins. Meanwhile in China: http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20170312-the-amazing-flying-machines-of-chinese-farmers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI2j4KEPQI4&t=75s

Tinfoil to cover trump's wig and orange face. Tinfoil to cover the walls of the WH. Only that can prevent spying from electrical appliances and electrical wall outlets.

Well I've heard that but I don't know of anyone who has actually induced a full developed spin and without control inputs. Waited until the AC recovered on its own. I think flight instructors tell students that when they first spin a C-172, C-150, PA-28, or one of the more common flight training aircraft. I was told that but i don't know anyone who actually tried it. The AC in question had the rear seats removed and two pilots but was within CG limits. They entered the spins at 5000' and 5500' AGL. The accident report was unable to identify or determine mechanical malfunctions. It is possible for Normal and Utility certified AC to enter unrecoverable spins, according to FAA. The AC was G-1000 equipped and they should have had 30-40 seconds of time while in the spin from that altitude. -G-1000 distraction? - both pilots seemed experienced.

Of course, but shouldn't be necessary in a 172. I don't know if a C-172 will recover from a full spin by removing all pilot inputs.

Wait till he finds out his idol is more powerful than he is! https://www.forbes.com/powerful-people/#44c0f4dd4d7e Then tonight: "CNN will air a documentary Monday night about Russian President Vladimir Putin titled, "THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD." "What is the true nature of the relationship between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin — and, what are the implications of their relationship for America and the world?" asks a CNN press release promoting the Fareed Zakaria special, which will air at 9 p.m." http://thehill.com/homenews/media/323643-cnn-to-air-putin-documentary-the-most-powerful-man-in-the-world Yesterday CBS 60 minutes had a feature on how Putin was successfully killing his critics and opponents. So you have to know that would piss trump off. He can't even get rid of Rosie O'Donnell.

My wife, an MD with over 30 years in clinical practice, assures me that the "delivers more" is true, but that the "more" is, as often as not, not indicated by any medical reasoning but by CYA and providing a steady revenue stream. Absolutely true. In exhibit #7 the commonwealth fund link that I made a couple posts above it shows that US healthcare costs for drugs, Physician services and hospital services is twice the UK, Canada and Australia. As well as higher than any other country in the study group. So all the b.s. of how great competition in the area of health services is just that b.s. So if Paul Rand has anything to do with the reform of the ACA it will proudly remain that way. Except brand trumpcare as a new term for failure. The only area of substantive difference referenced in the study above to indicate a social/physical reason for higher US costs was higher US obesity rates.

Facts= cognitive dissonance = anger = reaction- reinforcing established values, ideas and foundations of fixed thinking process. vs Facts= thinking= reevaluate recognized values, ideas and foundations of rational thought= change aforementioned, or reinforce them.

Its not like they started the maneuver at an altitude insufficient to normally recover. Or in a AC that has dangerous tendencies in that flight regime. Sometimes ____ happens.

At this point I have to agree that the single payer system would probably work better than this clusterfuck. I guess I'm OK with 6 month lead time for non-emergency surgery and the loss of the R&D carat. We know enough about medicine at this point...no need to investigate further. Yes, single payer with free market competition around the edges to keep service providers honest. Reform liability laws to cut back of the high costs of tests and excessive numbers of procedures to cover the asses of physicians from lawyers. Force drug companies to bid and match international pricing for drugs.Use drug review boards to weed out ineffective and overpriced drugs from coverage. trump has talked about this but so far it hasn't gone far. As the pushback from drug companies is substantial. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/oct/us-health-care-from-a-global-perspective http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/28/health/us-pays-more-for-drugs/ http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/23/12616730/prescription-drug-prices-american-healthcare-cost All three of these measures would cut US costs in 1/2, cover everyone, cut procedures in 1/2 and likely extend average lives by 1-2 years. Republicans need to overcome the ideas of "another entitlement" and legislation that forces the government to monitor competition, profits.

^^^^^ Me too. From what I've heard Mattis and McMaster are precisely the kind of men/leaders to deal with trump. I see great danger between trump and numnuts bannon. I actually give trump credit for the directions to the military that they can cut politicians out of the micromanagement of drone strikes, special forces raids, etc. Recognizing of course that all military operations need civilian oversight of some sort. Just as the CIA, FBI and NSA need civilian oversight.

Under Trump, will the generals speak up? In a system built on civilian rule, how far should military leaders and other national-security experts go to keep a president from blundering into catastrophe? The latest figure to begin walking this tightrope is Lieutenant General H. R. McMaster, Donald Trump’s choice as his new national security adviser. A combat veteran of Desert Storm and the more recent war in Iraq, McMaster is one of the few flag officers who can boast both a Silver Star and a history PhD. He is outspoken and iconoclastic, and McMaster’s career revealed him to be an innovative strategist who was willing to buck the military establishment — even to the point of damaging his own career. He pioneered the controversial counterinsurgency approach that gave the United States an exit strategy from Iraq, before being passed over for promotion by an Army that remained focused on traditional war-fighting. Yet McMaster also comes to his position with strong and established views that seem at odds with those of his new boss. In Iraq, McMaster was known for his respect of Islam and for polling detainees on whether their treatment was humane — a sharp contrast with the enthusiasm Trump has expressed for torture. While McMaster’s reputation as a disruptive outsider no doubt appealed to Trump, events may cast the general in a different role — not as the bull but as the guardian of the china shop. The tension between democracy and expertise in the making of foreign policy is as old as the American republic. The president arrives in office with a democratic mandate, and voters have a right to see their preferences reflected in foreign policy. But faced with the realities of governing, most presidents soon fall under the influence of national security experts in the “deep state,” who have better information and a better grounding in how diplomacy and military operations play out in the real world. Especially under an untested populist president who’s vowed to change treaties and alliances, these experts face a dilemma: How hard should they push back at rash civilian leaders? Already, some career officials are leaking information about the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia, underscoring the divide between Trump and the deep state. Other experts will quietly try to steer national security policy toward the status quo. But when does an attempt to moderate the White House actually become an exercise in enabling? We often think of civil-military relations in terms of sober elected politicians trying to hold back bloodthirsty generals and rapacious defense contractors. But generals do not always lean toward war, and civilians do not always lean toward peace. During the Clinton administration, it was then UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright who reportedly asked Joint Chiefs Chairman Colin Powell, “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?” Describing the moment in his memoir, Powell wrote, “I thought I would have an aneurysm.” In a similar spirit, many in the American military blame feckless politicians for dragging the United States into a losing war in Vietnam. McMaster turned that charge around in his 1997 book, “Dereliction of Duty.” By not insisting loudly and repeatedly to President Lyndon Johnson that America was sleepwalking into disaster, he argued, the Joint Chiefs had to share responsibility for the tragedy that ensued. On the one hand, McMaster argued that Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara were ignorant of military matters and contemptuous of the true experts. Driven by their own political imperative to find a shortcut to winning the war, they led the country into a quagmire for which it was ill-prepared. On the other hand, the experts shrunk from fulfilling their responsibility to the country by warning of what was to come. McMaster presumed that military experts had the power and the obligation to exercise independent judgment. Today, McMaster is joining an administration that openly scoffs at experts of all sorts and revels in following its populist political instincts. On Monday, President Trump argued that US military forces lose wars because “we don’t fight to win.” Trump is a self-proclaimed master of national security affairs who credits his knowledge to assiduously watching Fox News. He has proudly boasted: “I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me.” During his campaign, he also signaled a radical shift on established policies regarding torture, American alliances, and respect for Islam — policies that national security experts, including McMaster, have long regarded as vital to American security. Ethno-nationalists such as Stephen Bannon, a key Trump adviser, espouse a dark view of the world that, if translated into policy, would shred longstanding alliances and global norms. Historically, national security experts have been able to thwart sudden, radical shifts in US policy. In a sober briefing, the deep state can puncture the wildest campaign promise. This dynamic disappointed many supporters of Barack Obama, who saw promises to close Guantanamo and soften other aspects of the “war on terror” fade away into a continuation of the status quo. Trump’s supporters have not yet been similarly disillusioned. To an extent unlike any president in the modern era, Trump rejects the advice of the deep state — even disparaging one of its most sacred routines, the presidential daily brief. In the never-ending balancing act between democracy and expertise, he leans almost entirely toward the former. Now McMaster, who condemned Vietnam-era Americans for getting the relationship of expertise and democracy wrong, will himself be the one charged with striking the right balance. In his book, McMaster scolded Vietnam-era generals for forgetting that they ultimately served not themselves or their political masters, but the Constitution. Seen in this light, service in the Trump administration is a duty, even a noble sacrifice. But anyone engaging with today’s populists also risks becoming an enabler — just like the American generals who failed to prevent feckless and ignorant civilians from leading America into an unwinnable war in Vietnam. https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/03/05/under-trump-will-generals-speak/zxLx65VsJTg6L6cpidlEVO/story.htm

Because trump was a foreign agent. Like duh! President Obama got a $65 million book deal. Just imagine the book deal that Sean Spicer is going to get. $100 and $100's of millions. "My Lies in the White House" by Sean Spicer and the sequel "The Art of the Lie" by Sean Spicer

How the hell is it even vaguely possible the Trump vetting of Flynn was that bad? You don't believe it was known? Are you admitting your entire Administration is fucking incompetent? "WASHINGTON — Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s first national security adviser, acted as a foreign agent representing the interests of Turkey’s government in exchange for more than $500,000 during last year’s campaign even as he was advising Trump, according to disclosure forms filed this week.... Flynn signed a contract for the work just three weeks after delivering a fiery speech at the Republican National Convention endorsing Trump and leading “lock her up” chants advocating the imprisonment of Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while secretary of state. Without disclosing his financial interest, Flynn published an op-ed article on Election Day arguing that Turkey was misunderstood and assailing Gulen as “a shady Islamic mullah” and “radical Islamist.”... Democrats have raised concerns about Flynn’s private lobbying since last fall, including his decision to accept a fee reported around $40,000 to attend and speak at a Moscow gala celebration honoring RT, the Russian government-financed, English-language television network viewed in the West as a propaganda organ.... On behalf of his firm, the Flynn Intel Group, Flynn signed the contract Aug. 9 with Inovo, a Dutch firm owned by Ekim Alptekin, chairman of the Turkish-American Business Council. Flynn’s firm was to receive $600,000 for 90 days of work. His initial registration as a lobbyist last year indicated he would receive less than $5,000 for lobbying, although that presumably indicates that he did not define most of the services he would provide Alptekin as lobbying under the law... Flynn opened the Flynn Intel Group in October 2014, two months after he was forced out as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. The business was opaque, making little public, not even an address. When a reporter went looking for it last fall, he tracked it down to an Alexandria office building operating out of the nondescript headquarters of another firm, called the White Canvas Group. In an interview with The Times in October, Flynn offered only a vague description of the firm. He said he had clients in Japan and the Middle East and that “we do cybertraining. We have an exceptional cybertraining program.” He added: “That’s what we do. And we also support aviation operations, so we have some aviation logistics that we do. And we do some security consulting and we are also involved in the energy business.” He declined to specify clients, saying he had nondisclosure agreements with them. “I have international clients and I have some clients right here in the United States,” he said. According to this week’s filings, the firm was shuttered after the election when Flynn was headed for the White House." https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/03/10/michael-flynn-was-paid-represent-turkey-during-campaign/67bOZO4GRnUZEekmdY63bM/story.html Oh the trump swamp. Gold, gold and more gold.