Thumbs up: Michael Flynn ousted by a president — again

Given his cozy relations with Russia, reportedly abusive conduct with staff and insubordination toward former President Barack Obama, whom he once called “weak and spineless,” Michael Flynn is experienced at being at the center of controversy. He now also is experienced at being forced out of a presidential administration - for a second time. Three years after being fired by Obama as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Flynn submitted his resignation Monday at the request of President Donald Trump. His departure makes his tenure as national security adviser the shortest in the nation’s history.

His troubles are centered on a conversation he had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on Dec. 29, the very day Obama announced a series of measures taken against Russia for attempting to manipulate the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. When asked, Flynn denied talking about the retaliatory measures, a contention he repeated to Vice President Mike Pence.

But when you talk to a Russian ambassador, you had better expect someone is listening in. And they were. A transcript by intelligence officials reportedly shows that the two did discuss the sanctions, which Flynn has since acknowledged. According to the Washington Post, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who was fired on Jan. 30 on another matter, had warned the Trump administration that Flynn had lied and was therefore vulnerable to blackmail by Russian intelligence, who also had a transcript.

Flynn’s departure is worth a thumbs up. But this should not be the end of the matter. It’s unlikely that he would have been speaking to the Russian ambassador on his own accord. The question is, was he directed to make those conversations in possible violation of the Logan Act? And, if so, by whom? We agree with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who said, “I think Congress needs to be informed of what actually General Flynn said to the Russian ambassador about lifting sanctions.” While House Republican leaders appear to have no appetite for taking up the issue, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday that it’s “highly likely” the Senate intelligence committee would. If so, that’s another thumbs up.