Sally Yates -vs- Michael Flynn…

Prior to March 9th, 2016, the political surveillance and spy operations of the Obama administration were using the FBI and NSA database to track/monitor their opposition. However, once the NSA compliance officer began initiating an internal review of who was accessing the system, the CIA and FBI moved to create ex post facto justification for their endeavors. [Full Backstory]

After the November 8th, 2016, election everyone within the Obama network associated with the Trump surveillance operation was at risk. This is the impetus for the “Muh Russia” collusion- conspiracy narrative that was used as a mitigating shield. Within a few days after the election ODNI James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan began pushing the Russia election interference narrative in the media.

Without notifying anyone, NSA Director Mike Rogers went to Trump tower on November 18th, 2016.  Despite his compartmentalization it appears Rogers identified the NSA database abuse as the likely underpinning for some form of political surveillance.

By mid-December 2016 the Obama administration was deploying a full-court-press using their media allies to promote the Russia conspiracy.  However, despite their public proclamations Clapper and Brennan were refusing to give any specifics to congress.

The hard narrative was that Russia interfered. That was the specific push from within the Obama intelligence apparatus writ large.  All IC officials, sans Mike Rogers (NSA), had a self-interest in pushing this narrative; after all, it was the defensive mechanism to justify their illegal spying operation throughout 2016.  This was their insurance policy.

The media was doing their part; and using the information leaked to them by those who were part of the 2016 operation(s) began battering the Trump transition team every hour of every day with questions about the Russia hacking narrative; thereby fertilizing the seeds of a collusion conspiracy.

On December 29, 2016, the IC produced, and rushed to completion, a ridiculous document to support the false-premise.  This was called the Joint Analysis Report which claimed to outline the details of Russia’s involvement hacking into targeted political data base or computer systems during the election.  We were introduced to “Grizzley Steepe” and a goofy claim of Russian hackers.

On the same day (12/29/16) President Obama announced a series of sanctions against Russians who were located in Maryland.  This was Obama’s carefully constructed response to provide additional validity to the Joint Analysis Report.  After fueling the Russia conspiracy for several weeks the Obama administration knew this action would initiate a response from both Russia and the incoming Trump administration.

On the day the JAR was released and Obama made the announcement, President-elect Donald Trump and some of his key members were in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.  Incoming National Security Adviser Mike Flynn was on vacation in the Dominican Republic. As expected the Obama action spurred calls between Russian emissary Kislyak and Flynn.

The Obama IC were monitoring Kislyak communications and waiting for the contact.  Additionally, it is suspected Flynn may have been under a FISA surveillance warrant which seems confirmed by the Weissmann/Mueller report. The FBI intercepted, recorded, and later transcribed the conversation.

The media continued to follow the lead from the Obama White House and Intelligence Community (writ large) fueling a narrative that any contact with the Russians was proof of collusion of some sort.   In addition, the communications team of the White House, DOJ, FBI and aggregate IC began pushing a narrative surrounding the obscure Logan Act.

The ridiculous Logan Act promotion was targeted to infer that any action taken by the Trump campaign prior to taking office was interference with the political Obama Russia action, and would be evidence of collusion. That was the plan.  DOJ Deputy AG Sally Yates was in charge of pushing the Logan Act narrative to the media.

The first two weeks of January 2017 was now a merging of two necessary narratives: (1) Russian interference; and (2) the Logan Act. Each deployed against any entity who would counter the Russia narrative story.   The media were running this dual narrative 24/7 against the incoming Trump officials and demanding repeated answers to questions that were framed around this story-line.

On January 3rd, 2017, the new congressional year began.  SSCI Vice-Chair Dianne Feinstein abdicated her position within the Gang-of-Eight, and turned over the reigns to Senator Mark Warner.  Warner was now the vice-chair of the SSCI; and a Go8 member.

On January 6th, 2017, the Obama White House published the Intelligence Community Assessment, and declared:

We assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.  (pdf link)

It is not coincidental the ICA was “high confidence” by Brennan and Clapper; and less confidence by Mike Rogers (NSA).

With the Flynn Dec. 29, 2016, transcript in hand, the DOJ and FBI began aiding the Logan Act narrative with Obama intelligence officials supporting the Russia Conspiracy claims and decrying anyone who would interfere or counter the official U.S. position.

On January 14th, 2017, the content of the communication between Flynn and Kislyak was leaked to the Washington Post by an unknown entity. Likely the leak came from the FBI’s counterintelligence operation; the same unit previously carrying out the 2016 campaign spying operations. [Andrew McCabe is highly suspected]

The FBI CoIntel group (Strzok, McCabe etc.), and the DOJ-NSD group (Yates, McCord etc.) were the largest stakeholders in the execution of the insurance policy phase because they were the epicenter of spygate, fraudulent FISA presentations and the formation of the Steele Dossier.

The media leak of the Flynn conversation with Kislyak was critical because the DOJ/FBI were pushing a political narrative. This was not about legality per se’, this effort was about establishing the framework for a preexisting investigation, based on a false premise, that would protect the DOJ and FBI.  The investigation they needed to continue evolved into the Mueller special counsel.  This was all insurance.

The Flynn-Kislyak leak led to Vice-President Mike Pence being hammered on January 15th, 2017, during a CBS Face the Nation interview about Trump campaign officials in contact with Russians.  Pence was exceptionally unprepared to answer the questions and allowed the media to blend questions about campaign contacts with necessary, and entirely appropriate, transition team contacts.

Sunday January 15th, 2017 – VP-elect Mike Pence appears on Face The Nation. [Transcript Here]

JOHN DICKERSON: But there’s a distinction between that feeling about the press and legitimate inquiry, as you say, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is doing.

Just to button up one question, did any advisor or anybody in the Trump campaign have any contact with the Russians who were trying to meddle in the election?

MIKE PENCE: Of course not. And I think to suggest that is to give credence to some of these bizarre rumors that have swirled around the candidacy. (link)

*NOTE* The incoming administration was under a false-narrative siege created by the media.  At the time (early Jan, 2017) ‘any contact’ with Russians was evidence of meddling/election-collusion with Russians.  VP-elect Mike Pence poorly answered the question from Dickerson from a very defensive position.

The toxic media environment and Mike Pence speaking poorly during a Face The Nation interview now became a much bigger issue.

Once Vice-President Mike Pence made the statement that Flynn had no contact with anyone from Russia etc. any contradictory statement from Flynn would make Pence appear compromised.  Michael Flynn is now contrast against Pence’s false point without clarification.  As National Security Advisor Flynn was interviewed by the FBI on January 24th, nine days after Pence made his comments.

Tuesday January 24th – Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn was interviewed at the WH by the FBI.

During this ambush interview, disguised as a meeting, FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Agent Joe Pientka were contrasting Vice-President-elect Pence’s statements to CBS against the known action of Mike Flynn.  [Flynn has three options: either (1) Flynn contradicts Pence, or (2) he tells a lie; or (3) Flynn explains Pence misspoke, those were his options.]

How Flynn responded to the line of inquiry, and explained/reconciled the difference between Pence’s statement on Jan 15th and what actually took place on December 29th, 2016, is why the FBI ended up with the initial conclusion that Flynn wasn’t lying.

It is within this dynamic where the FD-302 reports, written by Strzok and Pientka, then became the subject of political manipulation by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

The FBI knew the content of the Flynn call with Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in.  The FBI were intercepting those communications.  So when Pence said no-one had any contact on January 15th, the FBI crew IMMEDIATELY knew they had an issue to exploit.

We see the evidence of the FBI knowing they had an issue to exploit, and being very nervous about doing it, in the text messages between Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok who would end up doing the questioning of Flynn.

The day before the Flynn interview:

January 23, 2017, the day before the Flynn interview, Lisa Page says: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails.” Weird!

♦Strzok replies: “I know. I just talked with John, we’re getting together as soon as I get in to finish that write up for Andy (MCCABE) this morning.” Strzok agrees with Page about being stressed that “THIS” could go off the rails… (Strzok’s meeting w Flynn the next day)

[We’re not sure who “John” is, but we know “Bill” is Bill Priestap, FBI Deputy Director in charge of Counterintelligence. And “Jen” is Jennifer Boone, FBI counterproliferation division]

So it’s the day before they interview Flynn.  Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about “THIS” potentially going off the rails?  The answer is simple: they knew the content of the phone call between Mike Flynn and Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in, and they were about to exploit the Pence statement to CBS.  In essence they were admitting to monitoring Flynn, that’s why they were so nervous.  They were planning and plotting with Andrew McCabe about how they were going to exploit the phone-tap and the difference in public statements by VP Mike Pence.

There’s a good possibility Flynn was honest but his honesty contradicted Pence’s national statement on CBS; and Flynn likely tried to dance through a needle without being overly critical of VP-elect Pence misspeaking.   Remember, the alternative: if Flynn is brutally honest, the media now runs with a narrative about Vice-President Pence as a national liar.  

Wednesday January 25th, 2017,  –  The Department of Justice, National Security Division, (at this timeframe Mary McCord was head of the DOJ-NSD) – received a detailed readout from the FBI agents who had interviewed Flynn. Yates said she felt “it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible.”

Thursday January 26th – (morning) Yates called White House Counsel Don McGahn first thing that morning to tell him she had “a very sensitive matter” that had to be discussed face to face. McGahn agreed to meet with Yates later that afternoon.

Thursday January 26th – (afternoonSally Yates traveled to the White House along with a senior member of the DOJ’s National Security Division, “who was overseeing the matter”, that is Mary McCord.  This was Yates’ first meeting with McGahn in his office, which also acts as a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF).

Yates said she began their meeting by laying out the media accounts and media statements made by Vice President Mike Pence and other high-ranking White House officials about General Flynn’s activity “that we knew not to be the truth.

According to Sally Yates testimony, she and Mary McCord presented all the information to McGahn so the White House could take action that they deemed appropriate.  When asked by McGahn if Flynn should be fired, Yates answered, “that really wasn’t our call.”

Yates also said her decision to notify the White House counsel had been discussed “at great length.”  According to her testimony: “Certainly leading up to our notification on the 26th, it was a topic of a whole lot of discussion in DOJ and with other members of the intel community.”

Friday January 27th – (morning)  White House Counsel Don McGahn called Yates in the morning and asked if she could come back to his office.

Friday January 27th – (late afternoon) According to her testimony, Sally Yates returned to the White House late that afternoon.  One of McGahn’s topics discussed was whether Flynn could be prosecuted for his conduct.

Specifically, according to Yates, one of the questions *McGahn asked Yates: “Why does it matter to DOJ if one White House official lies to another?” She explained that it “was a whole lot more than that,” and reviewed the same issues outlined the prior day.

[*If you consider that McGahn was trying to thread the needle between Mike Pence’s poorly worded response to CBS, and Michael Flynn’s FBI questioning that came after Pence’s statement, McGahn would see the no-win situation Flynn was in during that inquisition.]

McGahn then expressed his concern that taking any action might interfere with the FBI investigation of Flynn, and Yates said it wouldn’t: “It wouldn’t really be fair of us to tell you this and then expect you to sit on your hands,” Yates claims to have told McGahn.

McGahn asked if he could look at the underlying evidence of Flynn’s conduct, and she said they would work with the FBI over the weekend and “get back with him on Monday morning.”

Friday January 27th, 2017 – (evening) In what appears to be only a few hours later, President Trump is having dinner with FBI Director James Comey where President Trump asked if he was under investigation. Trump was, but to continue the auspices of the ongoing investigation, Comey lied and told him he wasn’t.

This why the issue of how the FBI agents write the 302 summary of the Flynn interview becomes such an important facet.   We see that dynamic again playing out in the messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; with Andrew McCabe providing the guidance.

Don’t forget, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was likely the person who leaked the content of the Mike Flynn phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak to the Washington Post.  A massive leak of highly classified information:

Within the case against Michael Flynn, prosecutor Brandon Van Grack later filed a cover letter attempting to explain the reason for the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, and a delay in the official filing of the interview notes (FD-302) on February 15th, 2017, and then another edit on May 31st, 2017.

To explain the FBI delay, Van Grack claimed the FD-302 report “inadvertently” had a header saying “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL” (screen grab)

What the special counsel appeared to be obfuscating was a process of deliberation within the investigative unit, headed by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, surrounding the specific wording of the 302 report on the Flynn interview.  Likely how best to word the FBI notes for maximum damage.

In late 2018 Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack was attempting to hide the length of the small group deliberations within the FBI. In hindsight it seems he did not want the court to know Andrew McCabe was involved in shaping how the Flynn-302 was written.

However, we know there was a deliberative process in place, seemingly all about how to best position the narrative, because we can see the deliberations in text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok: See below (note the dates):

The text message conversation above is February 14th, 2017.

The Michael Flynn FD-302 was officially entered into the record on February 15th, 2017, per the report:

The interview took place on January 24th, 2017. The FD-302 was drafted on January 24th, and then later edited, shaped, and ultimately approved by McCabe, on February 14th, then entered into the official record on February 15th.

It was a deliberative document from the outset. Thanks to the Strzok/Page text messages we know the cover letter from the Special Counsel is misleading.  The Feb 15th, 2017, date was the day after McCabe approved it (three weeks after the FBI interview).

May 17th, 2017, Robert Mueller was assigned as special Counsel. Then, the FD-302 report was re-entered on May 31st, 2017, removing the header; paving the way for Mueller’s team to use the content therein.

This level of overt corruption, and corrupt intent within the special counsel, is one of the more brutally obvious reasons why authorizing Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein should be regarded as participating in a political framing against the Trump White House.  

The FBI interpretation of the Flynn interview was the way the DOJ and FBI could control the interview content; and specifically because the only recourse Flynn would have to contradict that FBI interpretation would be to compromise the Vice President… Flynn cannot openly challenge the structure of the narrative within the 302 outline.

See what happened?

Does it all make sense now?

Do you see why there are reports of the second FBI agent, Joe Pientka, saying he didn’t believe Flynn lied to them in the interview. Likely because Flynn didn’t lie; but the McCabe crew jumped on the opportunity to frame a lose/lose. Either Flynn accepts a version of the 302 report where he lied; or, Flynn has to take the position that Vice President Mike Pence lied to the nation in the CBS Face The Nation interview.

See how that went down?

However, after Weissmann and Mueller enter the picture, they need to force Flynn to admit to the construct of the 302 as presented.  For that they need some leverage.

The original authorization for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller was May 17th, 2017.  The recently released Weissmann report shows there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe.  The first scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel.

The second scope memo was issued by Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller on October 20th, 2017.  The transparent intent of the second scope memo was to provide Weissmann and Mueller with ammunition and authority to investigate specific targets, for specific purposes.  One of those targets was General Michael Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn Jr.

As you review the highlighted portion below, found on pages 12 and 13 of the Weissmann report, read slowly and fully absorb the intent; the corruption is blood-boiling:

This second scope memo allowed Weissmann and Mueller to target tangentially related persons and entities bringing in Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn Jr.  Additionally this memo established the authority to pursue “jointly undertaken activity“.

The four identified targets within the original July 2016 investigation, “Operation Crossfire Hurricane”, were George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and Carter Page. (See HPSCI report):

General Flynn was under investigation from the outset in mid-2016. The fraudulent FBI counterintelligence operation, established by CIA Director John Brennan, had Flynn as one of the early targets when Brennan handed the originating electronic communication “EC” to FBI Director James Comey on/around July 31st, 2016.

The investigation of General Flynn never stopped throughout 2016 and led to the second investigative issue of his phone call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak:

Page #12 October 20th, 2017, Scope Memo:

The first redaction listed under “personal privacy” is unknown. However, the second related redaction is a specific person, Michael Flynn Jr.

In combination with the October 2017 timing, the addition of Flynn Jr to the target list relates to the ongoing 2016/2017 investigation of his father for: (1) possible conspiracy with a foreign government; (2) unregistered lobbying; (3) materially false statements and omissions on 2017 FARA documents; and (4) lying to the FBI.

This October 20th, 2017, request from Weissmann and Mueller aligns with the time-frame were special counsel team lawyers Brandon L. Van Grack and Zainab N. Ahmad were prosecuting Michael Flynn and cornering him into a guilty plea

Getting Rosenstein to authorize adding Mike Flynn Jr. to the target list (scope memo #2) meant the special counsel could threaten General Flynn with the indictment of his son as a co-conspirator tied to the Turkish lobbying issue (which they did) if he doesn’t agree to a plea. Remember: “jointly undertaken activity“.

Forcing a plea for ‘lying to investigators‘ by threatening prosecution for FARA violations was the identical strategy used against both George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn.

The October 20th, 2017, expanded scope memo authorized Mueller to start demanding records, phones, electronic devices and other evidence from Mike Flynn Jr, and provided the leverage Weissmann wanted.  After all, Mike Flynn Jr. had a four month old baby. 

The amount of twisted pressure from this corrupt team of prosecutors is sickening.  A month later, General Flynn was signing a plea agreement:

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Abusive Cops, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, FBI, IG Report FISA Abuse, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, Russia, Spygate, Spying, Susan Rice, THE BIG UGLY, Treason, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

237 Responses to Sally Yates -vs- Michael Flynn…

  1. Mac says:

    Before everyone gets all excited about the information coming to light concerning the Obama Administration activities, remember that almost everyone in DC, at that tie, was up to their ears in some kind of scandalous behavior. All are subject to blackmail.

    We have the Syrian Civil War, which was largely being prosecuted by Al Quada, Hezbollah and, later, ISIL/S. This was heavily supported by certain members of Congress, most notably John McCain and Lindsey Graham. McCain was even photographed meeting with high ranking members of ISIL/S, in Syria. It is theorized that the Syrian Civil War was being bankrolled by the CIA, and supported by members of Congress, because the Assad government was blocking a pipeline from the Gulf States to Europe, which would have negatively impacted Russian petroleum and natural gas deliveries to Europe. These same Congressional hawks backed the removal of Khadafi, in Libya, and the subsequent movement of Libyan arms to the Syrian Rebels. This is only one of the more public points of leverage which the Establishment has to protect itself. The idea that the Obama database, of compromising material, was not copied and stored elsewhere, before Obama left office, is ludicrous. And, DC is based entirely upon graft and corruption. Points of leverage are nearly endless. Why did so many Republican Congress Critters bail, after Trump’s election?

    What this all means is that it is unlikely that those at the top of the conspiracy will ever be prosecuted. Some of the minor, and perhaps a few of the mid-level players will be prosecuted, but the top will remain insulated. The one person most vulnerable, who is in a position to bring the whole house of card down, is HRC. The Clintons were the bagmen for the largest pay for play scheme in US history. They have the knowledge and the records.And, they will do almost anything to save themselves. That is the point of maximum leverage, here. Will it be used? Unknown. There are simply too many names in the Clinton’s books.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. FH says:

    So… in his role as National Security Adviser, Flynn has a conversation with Mr. Kisylak [a legitimate official of the Russian government], something that was neither illegal nor improper; Pence says that no one from the Trump Admin had contact with, “Russians attempting to interfere…”. Why, then, would it have been a problem for either Flynn, Pence [or both?] to simply say that Pence wasn’t aware of some perfectly legal and proper communication between Flynn, a National Security Adviser, which hardly falls under the auspices of, “Russians attempting to interfere…” ?

    Liked by 4 people

    • Scott says:

      @FH….I have often wondered the very same thing. Just think what might have been prevented if but for a little embarrassment, or a little back-walking with “I didn’t know” or “missed it at a hectic time during the transition”…something, ANYTHING? I hate to say it, but I put this one on Mr. Pence. He could have fixed this within minutes.

      Liked by 2 people

      • For Eyes says:

        Pence is not an honorable man, and not the sharpest tack in the box.

        So you have Pence having screwed up, and Flynn is not his man. So Pence saved his own skin and blamed Flynn.

        Never, ever, trust Pence. Take that to the bank. Hopefully Trump leave him on the curb for the next run and find someone better.

        Like

    • wlbeattie says:

      IIRC Sundance already answered this simply put: #MSM + #FakeNews.

      The media were already having a (totally unchallenged) Field-Day!
      They would have used either side off the Lose-Lose choice as more SENSATIONAL fodder for the masses.

      Someone may remember the link to the #CTH article dealing with this.

      Like

    • check my comment below, it will fill in what you already suspect to be sketchy.

      Like

    • Midnight Smoker says:

      On that point, It wouldn’t have been problem, but the real issue comes later on in the Pence interview (see full Transcript) when Pence is asked if sanctions were discussed.  Pence responds by saying that he had spoken to Michael Flynn and that sanctions were NOT discussed.

      Now fast forward to the Michael Flynn charging document which references the intercepted phone call between him and Kislyak:  On or about Dec. 29, Flynn asked Kislyak to “refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed on Russia that same day.” The document also reveals that Kislyak told Flynn that Russia “had chosen to moderate its response to those sanctions as a result of his request.”

      So that’s the real issue, and that was the hook the FBI needed to interview Flynn. It was another element to move the scheme along.

      Like

      • Midnight Smoker says:

        So in summary, Pence lied and Flynn took the fall for it.

        So much trouble could’ve been avoided if Pence would’ve just said, “We’re talking about ALL of the issues with our counterparts including sanctions, and while no concrete steps have been taken in regard to any specific future policies, we intend to track a very different path from our predecessors, and we have made that known, and it should come as no surprise to anyone.”

        Like

  3. OldParatrooper says:

    McCabe was out to get Flynn because Flynn had supported a female FBI agent’s sexual discrimination claim against the FBI (including McCabe). They seized on Director Flynn’s visit to Moscow and the subsequent Mr. Flynn visit to give a paid speech as “evidence” that Flynn was pro-Russia and might be portrayed as an agent for Russia with the right leverage.

    They also seized on the miscommunication between Flynn and Pence that resulted in the Pence misstatement on CBS.

    Not at all surprised that they threatened Flynn Jr. to get a guilty plea from Flynn.

    And the worst part was they did it in our names.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. ann says:

    🤙. We need to transfer DoJ’s institutional authority to a sealed parallel organization run by patriotic outsiders. The DoJ (& presumably compromised Judiciary) has destroyed our international credibility and legitimacy as a law abiding nation. Our mechanism to govern has been emasculated by placating an institution which does not respect or fear citizens.
    This generational slide into totalitarianism is a shameful indictment of our strength of character. Reciprocate, withhold respect and power. No more complex excuses, no trust, no delays, and no more freedom for their cadre of abusers. Fear must be two way.
    Also,
    Who are the idiots that give our power away to this inbred caste of wealthy politically connected executives? Let me guess, the Senate DNC/GOPe Club?

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Bob fornly says:

    How on gods earth can we allow this group of traitors to remain in their jobs ? How deep does the official state U.S. Gestapo run ? Americas federal intelligence and law-enforcement community has zero credibility. At this point they have neither the moral nor legal authority to lead anyone. Why should anyone respect or follow the orders of a U.S. federal law-enforcement officer ? They are a complete joke.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Issy says:

    Does anyone know what is going on with General Flynn’s case? The judge said he wasn’t going to sentence him because he needed to continue his cooperation with mueller. The investigation wrapped up a month ago. We have dead silence on what his fate is.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. TrustyHaste says:

    I always suspected this is how it happened. Pence answered awkwardly and Flynn fell on his sword.

    Like

  8. jay rice says:

    Excellent work Sundance

    Like

  9. Gadsden says:

    I don’t trust this Judge Sullivan directive to unseal after his previous comments about “treason.” I don’t like it one bit. My spidey senses tell me that there’s some kind of derogatory information against the Trump admin in there. Deep State fighting back?

    Like

  10. The strangest and as yet completely unexplained part of this issue is the actions of VP Pence, but I suspect that is about to be exposed. Pence was the chairman of the transition team he knew everything that was taking place. It is known fact that the transition team met and discussed Obama’s sanctions, spoke to Flynn by telephone while he was on vacation and approved what Flynn would say to Kislyak. Flynn made the call, then called the transition team to debrief them on the call. This is procedural, standard and understandable practice.

    This means that Pence, Reibus and Spicer all knew exactly what was discussed. Taking another part of the NBC transcript, it is clear Pence did much more than mis-speak, he lied.

    JOHN DICKERSON: Let me ask you about it was reported by David Ignatius that the incoming national security advisor Michael Flynn was in touch with the Russian ambassador on the day the United States government announced sanctions for Russian interference with the election. Did that contact help with that Russian kind of moderate response to it? That there was no counter-reaction from Russia. Did the Flynn conversation help pave the way for that sort of more temperate Russian response?

    MIKE PENCE: I talked to General Flynn about that conversation and actually was initiated on Christmas Day he had sent a text to the Russian ambassador to express not only Christmas wishes but sympathy for the loss of life in the airplane crash that took place. It was strictly coincidental that they had a conversation. They did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia.

    JOHN DICKERSON: So did they ever have a conversation about sanctions ever on those days or any other day?

    MIKE PENCE: They did not have a discussion contemporaneous with U.S. actions on–

    JOHN DICKERSON: But what about after–

    MIKE PENCE: –my conversation with General Flynn. Well, look. General Flynn has been in touch with diplomatic leaders, security leaders in some 30 countries. That’s exactly what the incoming national security advisor–

    JOHN DICKERSON: Absolutely.

    MIKE PENCE: –should do. But what I can confirm, having spoken to him about it, is that those conversations that happened to occur around the time that the United States took action to expel diplomats had nothing whatsoever to do with those sanctions.

    JOHN DICKERSON: But that still leaves open the possibility that there might have been other conversations about the sanctions.

    MIKE PENCE: I don’t believe there were more conversations.

    Now that Flynn’s court filings are reaching their climax, hopefully we will learn more as to why Pence lied to NBC, hung General Flynn out to dry and allowed him to be fired and charged with a crime by the FBI.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s