First things first: ♦Understand Obama’s Surveillance Operation HERE.  ♦Michael Flynn wasn’t under a FISA (Title-1) HERE …. that’s the background.

The riddle of how the White House discovered the telephone call and subsequent content between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak appears to have been solved. The FBI used a “Pen Register.”  There was no unmasking, and no warrant.

A pen register is a device/process which records the telephone numbers of outgoing calls.  Monitoring outgoing call numbers does not require a search warrant or FISA.

After the 2016 election Lt. Gen Flynn was given a government issued secure cell phone; a blackberry device for use.  However, with Flynn under a preexisting FBI investigation the phone numbers Flynn was calling in December ’16 and January ’17 were being monitored.

A review of prior testimony by former FBI Director James Comey [HERE]; prior testimony by former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe [Here]; and a cross-reference of recent releases of Flynn unmasking documents [Here] tells the full story.

In December of 2016 incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was under a sketchy FBI Counterintelligence investigation for possible coordination with Russia.  According to recent documents and the Comey transcript, the Flynn investigation began in the summer of 2016; that investigation was ongoing in late December.

After President Obama initiated sanctions against Russia on December 29, 2016. The Obama administration was trying to figure out why Russia was not reacting.  According to James Comey testimony the intelligence community, writ large, was tasked to find out why Russia was not reacting more severely.  See Transcript:

(more…)

It’s always worthwhile to revisit past assertions and denials when presented with new evidence.  Consider this…

During an interview on April 26, 2019, former Deputy National Security Advisor to President Obama, Ben Rhodes, told a journalist the Obama White House didn’t even know there was an FBI investigation into President-elect Trump or Michael Flynn.  WATCH:

.

If the White House didn’t know about an FBI investigation into Michael Flynn (per Ben Rhodes), then how does President Obama tell the FBI to conduct their investigation “by the book” according to Ben Rhodes boss, National Security Advisor Susan Rice.  See the problem?

(more…)

Against the unmasking discussion currently underway, it is worthwhile contrasting the distinctions between: (1) the NSA unmasking of incidental collection; and (2) the FBI unmasking as a result of targeted investigations.

There is a big difference between the two types; and Mike Flynn was a subject of both.

Appearing before a congressional committee on March 20, 2017, FBI Director James Comey outlined the FBI parameters for unmasking U.S. persons who are captured as part of domestic FBI surveillance.

.

The distinction between the two unmasking aspects is becoming increasingly important. The FBI is currently claiming the Flynn-Kislyak call was due to “incidental collection”; this is a lie. The New York Times is pushing that lie today:

(more…)

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

Former Judge John Gleeson (U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of New York) recently penned an op-ed in the Washington post arguing that Flynn should continue to be prosecuted.

(more…)

First things first: ♦Understand Obama’s Surveillance Operation HERE.  ♦Michael Flynn wasn’t under a FISA (Title-1) HERE …. that’s the background.

Devin Nunes appears with Lou Dobbs to discuss the recent list of Obama-era officials who unmasked NSA intercepts of Michael Flynn talking to foreign government officials.  Rep. Nunes reminds the audience that Flynn is only one person within a much larger group of Trump transition team members who were under surveillance by Team Obama.

(more…)

A few points on the unmasking before Rand Paul response.  First, the release today is only what the Obama team did regarding unmasking General Flynn.  As Devin Nunes previously outlined, there are many more Trump transition team members who were unmasked as the Obama team conducted surveillance on the incoming administration.

Second, the NSA “reports” are related to actual transcripts, emails and text messages of communication; not just various intelligence interpretations of those communications.

As Senator Rand Paul shares, the effort of the Obama and Biden administration to unmask their political opposition during the transition; and then use widespread distribution and leaks to the media to push a specific one-sided view; is the weaponization of the intelligence apparatus to target political opposition.  That’s the major issue:

.

Again, a reminder, these reports surround only NSA intercepts. Simultaneous to this there was an ongoing FBI counterintelligence operation using FISA surveillance (Carter Page) and non-fisa targeted FBI surveillance of Michael Flynn.

(more…)

For the sake of understanding this specific release, “unmasking” occurs when the NSA, eavesdropping on foreign communications, sweeps up communications with U.S. citizen. That is known as “incidental collection.”

When the intelligence about that communication is shared across the government, the names of U.S. citizens in the communication are typically concealed or masked to protect their identities. However, the names can be unmasked if U.S. officials make the request.

In this release [pdf here], the Obama-era NSA was monitoring various foreign government officials and within their communication they picked up contacts with incoming President-elect Trump’s National Security Advisor Lt. General Michael Flynn.  This release only includes NSA intercepts; not other intelligence agency reports; only the NSA.

The NSA generated [redacted number] of reports based on those foreign contacts. The reports are actual transcripts of the conversations.  The Obama-era officials then asked the NSA to unmask the name of General Flynn so they could see the content and context of the calls.  Current DNI Ric Grenell has assembled a list of who asked the NSA to unmask incoming NSA Michael Flynn from November 8, 2016 through January 31, 2017.

It is important to remember, these intercepts are part of the normal function of monitoring foreign communications.  There is nothing nefarious about the monitoring and there is nothing nefarious about a foreign person contacting the incoming administration, via General Flynn, to begin preparing for the change in administrations.

However, what is completely alarming and disturbing, is the extent to which the Obama administration went to share the contacts and transcripts of the calls with a myriad of government officials.  That’s where the list comes in.

(more…)

There has been a shift; it’s subtle, it’s nuanced, but it’s there.  Against the revelations that Ric Grenell has declassified multiple component parts of weaponized intelligence used against candidate, President-elect and President Trump; and with the unmasking data as only one part of that larger component grouping; DOJ Spokesperson Kerri Kupec says: “what happened to candidate Trump was one of the greatest political injustices in history.”

While AG Bill Barr doesn’t need to sign-off on the specific wording by the DOJ spox, the overarching public statement would never be articulated without institutional approval.  The AG cannot make public comments that are too strong, but authorizing the spokesperson to articulate the position is one way to accomplish the same.  WATCH:

.

Insufferably Martha MacCallum ‘pretends not to know’ the distinction in intelligence equity; she asks the same question repeatedly.  The answer is clear.  DNI Ric Grenell has presented one component group of intelligence data, the identity of the unmaskers and who they unmasked, to the DOJ.  The DNI retains ownership and can release.

(more…)

Now the purpose of the leaked conference call, aka instructions, from former President Barack Obama come into play.  In a very unusual move today Michael Flynn’s judge, Emmet Sullivan, enters an order granting outside parties the time to enter amicus briefs (friend of the court) to assist in guiding the court; a briefing schedule to follow.

…”Given the posture of the case the court anticipates individuals and organizations will seek leave to file amicus briefs” …

It looks like the judge wants to give former DOJ employees (2,000 signatures on letter) an opportunity to publicly undermine and undercut the position of the DOJ in moving to dismiss the charges.  Infuriating, remarkable and transparently political.

Judge Sullivan even cited famously political Judge Amy Berman Jackson, a subtle hat/tip to President Obama’s recent May 8th instructions.  Sullivan’s order can put to rest any contemplation of him holding corrupt prosecutor Brandon Van Grack to account; and only further delays removing the sword of damocles from atop Lt. General Michael Flynn.

The transparent purpose of allowing public comment, specifically from the Lawfare resistance group, is to undermine the DOJ and further create a political narrative around AG Bill Barr.   However, on the positive side this might stir Barr to release even more damaging information to counter the political efforts of Judge Sullivan.  Quite remarkable.

(more…)

The great Lou Dobbs interviews Flynn’s exceptional defense lawyer, Sidney Powell, about the ongoing revelations directly and indirectly connected to the case against her client.

Ms. Powell is not only Flynn’s lawyer, but she’s one of the few people who put the picture together early and recognized President Obama’s surveillance state included the weaponization of the NSA database.  Now that revelations are quickly surfacing, Powell is in a strong position to help people see how the dots connect over multiple years. WATCH:

.

Note: This interview took place prior to the recent order by Judge Sullivan delaying his decision and granting political allies time to petition the court and undermine the DOJ.

(more…)