The defensive posture by those attempting to deflect attention from the political unmasking requests made by the Obama-era administration and embed career officials is to highlight the volume of unmasking requests made in 2017 and 2018.

This is presented in a good question received via Twitter:

“Sundance what is your take on this fact that’s getting thrown around about 16,000 unmaskings in 2018? Wallace makes sure to point that out, and that it is not a crime itself, but leaking it is a crime. Although if the unmasking isn’t for the purpose stated it should be a crime.”

The answer is really quite simple. Think about what the Special Counsel’s office [Mueller Team] previously explained about the SCO investigation… These requests flowed through a very facilitating DNI Dan Coats and explains the vast majority of “unmasking” requests:

Again, in order for the media to retain their resistance bona fides, and keep the flow of their cocktail party invites, they have to pretend not to know things.

Carry on.

(more…)

Former Acting AG Matt Whitaker appears on Sunday Morning Futures to discuss the latest DOJ and FBI issues surfacing as a result of the Flynn case.  Additionally Matt Whitaker gives his perspective on Judge Emmet Sullivan’s latest efforts.

(more…)

Brilliant Agitprop: The power of government comes from the people; or as we say in the U.S. “from the consent of the governed.” When the people lead, the politicians are forced to follow.

It is the responsibility of each of us to stand, defiantly if needed, and support a President who is waging a battle against multiple adversaries on our behalf.  “Stand” means be visible.  “Stand” means let your voice be heard. “Stand” means telling your republican representatives what your expectations are.  They represent us; WE are the people.

We are the elite.

He is our weapon.

As we bear witness, anyone trying to convince us this entire assembly of our union is headed in the right direction, well, they might want to revisit their proximity to the 2020 election ballpark. Because they’re not just out of the city – they’re also out of the same state the election ballpark is located in….. Then again, the media know that.

David Mamet had a famous saying, essentially: …‘in order for democrats, liberals, progressives et al to continue their illogical belief systems they have to pretend not to know a lot of things’… By pretending ‘not to know’ there is no guilt, no actual connection to conscience. Denial of truth allows easier trespass.

(more…)

The Washington Post headline reads (emphasis mine): “Federal judge hires high-powered D.C. attorney to defend his actions in Flynn case.” Which gives some insight into the framework and purpose of this event, and how it reached the WaPo narrative engineers.

The Washington Post is, as an institution, adverse to the interests of Michael Flynn.  So this story, specifically the events behind the story, are written in a posture to aid Judge Sullivan and oppose Flynn.  Keep that in mind (I’ll explain after).

Judge Sullivan has hired a high profile DC lawyer to assist him in responding to the inquires of the DC circuit:

WASHINGTON DC – […] In a rare step that adds to this criminal case’s already unusual path, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has retained Beth Wilkinson to represent him in defending his decision to a federal appeals court in Washington, according to a person familiar with the hire who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

[…] Wilkinson, known for her top-notch legal skills and get-results style, is expected to file a notice with the court in the coming week about representing the judge. She declined to comment when reached Friday evening. Sullivan also declined to comment through his office.

(more…)

On the topic of the FBI capture and use of the December 29, 2016, Flynn-Kislyak phone call…  First we had a hunch; then it became a suspicion… that evolved into a likelihood… that has now become a strong probability.

The capture of the December 29th phone call, which generated the raw “CR cuts“, was an FBI summary, modified for a specific interpretation.  Much like the missing 302 there is now a very strong probability the FBI ‘CR cuts’ do not represent the actual call content.

In this short interview segment Trey Gowdy alludes to one issue, and speaks directly to another.  First, the only reason the FBI opened the internal INSD review is because the information previously hidden has become public.  Second, the Flynn-Kislyak calls that Trey Gowdy has reviewed were “boring” nothing-burgers.  WATCH:

.

SELECTIVE CAPTURE – Did you note the part where the FBI told Gowdy some of the Flynn phone calls were “not captured”?  Wouldn’t it be a very convenient framework if the FBI was going to summarize one of those non-captured calls into a “CR cut.” 

FBI: “Oh, sorry, we don’t have the actual transcript, but we do have a summary of what we interpreted that call content to be.”  Huh, funny that.

(more…)

Former Acting AG Matt Whitaker appears with Liz MacDonald to discuss the latest revelations in the Flynn case; the ongoing declassification of documents by DNI Ric Grenell; and the announcement of a new internal FBI investigation.  WATCH:

(more…)

Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard “Ric” Grenell announced today he is in the process of declassifying the transcripts of the calls between Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

Within a twitter response by Grenell, part of the riddle behind the transcripts gets a little more clarity: “The IC doesn’t have all the transcripts/summaries…. it wasn’t our product.”

The implication here is the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) did not generate one of the transcripts; that evolved into an FBI equity, and was later used in their case against Lt. General Michael Flynn. The December 29, 2016, intercept was not exclusive to the U.S. intelligence apparatus, and the call summary became proprietary to the FBI; the agency exploiting the underlying content.

This makes sense and explains how the FBI was able to manipulate the framework of the call and keep the remaining U.S. intelligence system away from their internal plan.

There was more than one phone call and conversation between Flynn and Kislyak.  Some immediately after the election and in/around mid-December 2016.  Reports of those contacts and communications WERE in the U.S. IC network and those reports led to unmasking requests.  However, the specific December 29th communication was not an exclusive intercept of the U.S. intelligence community and therefore easier for the FBI to shape.

(more…)

This is not a surprising development; though with breaking news it is prudent to pause before assigning motives.  At first review it appears the FBI cannot hold back the sunlight.

FBI Director Christopher Wray has announced his launching of an internal investigation based on details surfacing from the Michael Flynn case. “FBI Director Christopher Wray today ordered the Bureau’s Inspection Division [INSD] to conduct an after-action review of the Michael Flynn investigation” the bureau said in the statement:

(screen grab from Catherine Herridge)

This is an interesting development considering this same FBI Director previously claimed the office of inspector general found no intentional wrongdoing by people within the FBI; and Wray further asserted there was “no evidence of political bias” after each of three OIG investigations completed in 2018 and 2019.

If the OIG did not find FBI wrongdoing, then what changed?  Why is FBI Director Chris Wray now launching an internal investigation?  The answer appears to be an outsider’s investigation via Missouri U.S. Attorney, Jeff Jensen.

Second part of statement below:

(more…)

You may have recently noticed that Susan Rice has called for the release of the transcript of the conversation between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak:

(Source and Full Statement)

However, what many people do not realize is the motive for Susan Rice to call for the release of this transcript.  This aspect of the intercepted communication is very interesting.

First, there is nothing damaging in the content of the Flynn-Kislyak call.  We know there is nothing damaging in the transcript because the call was made on December 29, 2016; and the FBI investigators who intercepted the call reviewed the call content; and five days later on January 4, 2017, the same Washington DC field office of the FBI wanted to close the investigation of Michael Flynn having “found no derogatory information.”

If there had been something damaging within the call to either the incoming Trump administration, or Michael Flynn himself, the FBI would not be saying they have found nothing derogatory and they were closing the Flynn investigation five days after the call.

Additionally, we also know there was nothing damaging or inappropriate within the call because Robert Mueller’s investigators outlined the content:

(more…)

Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell appears for an interview with Liz MacDonald to discuss the latest revelations in the Obama effort to target Lt. General Michael Flynn. Within the interview Ms. Powell walks through the timeline/process of FBI Director James Comey intercepting the Flynn Kislyak call and briefing former DNI James Clapper, who in turn briefed President Obama on January 4, 2017.  {Go Deep}

Additionally, Ms. Powell discusses the latest order by the DC appeals court requesting a response from Flynn’s Judge Emett Sullivan to explain why he refuses to accept the unopposed motion by the DOJ and defense team to drop the charges against Mr. Flynn.

(more…)