To the Editor:
According to your Feb. 11 page 2A AP article, national defense secretary Michael Flynn, questionably now retired or fired, has a recollection problem.
But is the question did he discuss sanctions against Russia with Russia’s ambassador before Donald Trump was elected, or why? Sanctions are designed to affect political activity with economic restrictions, but while such restrictions may eventually produce the desired result, they immediately affect the profitability of businesses no longer allowed to do business with the affected nation. So, is the question do American and Russian business people care more about profitability, than the Russian occupation of Crimea and aggressive encroachment in Ukraine?
Did the Russian government interfere with America’s last presidential election, or politically powerful Russian business people, who stood to gain from politically powerful American business people gaining control of our nation’s government? After all, don’t American business people now fill the presidential cabinet? Why would presidential campaigners secretly cooperate with Russian hackers? Didn’t Watergate prove the serious consequences of campaign interference, resulting in prosecution, conviction and incarceration of some of the perpetrators? Are Russian hackers subject to American law?
Whether sanctions against foreign governments achieve the desired results or not, they negatively affect the profitability of business people, too many of whom obviously care more about profits than humanity, now don’t they?
Was Michael Flynn’s discussion with Russian’s ambassador an assurance that sanctions would be lifted if Russia assisted Donald Trump’s election?
Robert C. Currie Jr.