Thread by @themarketswork

1) My latest @EpochTimes Were Events Surrounding Gen. Flynn’s Moscow Visit Intentionally Misframed?

My apologies in advance. This is of necessity rather long
theepochtimes.com/were-events-su…

2) On Dec. 10, 2015, General Michael Flynn attended a dinner in Moscow honoring the 10th anniversary of Russian television network RT.

Flynn, who was seated next to Putin for the culminating dinner, was also interviewed on national security matters by a RT correspondent.

3) Flynn’s speaker bureau, Leading Authorities, was paid $45,000 for the event. Flynn received $33,000 of the total.

Flynn reportedly joined the Trump campaign in late Feb 2016 as an informal advisor on foreign policy matters—although his actual start date is not entirely clear.

4) Flynn’s trip to Russia was first brought to larger attention in July 18, 2016 during a live interview at the Republican National Convention with Yahoo News reporter Michael Isikoff.
yahoo.com/news/trump-sup…

5) Isikoff:

You flew over to Moscow to participate in the 10th anniversary—a celebration of RT - Russian television. A propaganda arm of the Russian government. And you sat next to Vladimir Putin at a celebratory dinner. Why did you attend that event?

6) Flynn:

Because I wanted to tell Russia to get Iran the hell out of the four proxy wars that they’re involved in in the Middle East in order for us to settle the situation down … my intent for speaking at that event...was to talk about Russia’s influence over Iran

7) Isikoff ignored Flynn’s response and continued his line of questioning:

Isikoff: Were you paid for that event?

Flynn: Yeah, I went over there as a speaking event. It was a speaking event. What difference does that make? Does somebody go, ‘Oh he was paid by the Russians!’?

8) Following the Isikoff interview, the matter was further pursued by Washington Post reporter Dana Priest, who published a combined an-person and telephone interview with Flynn in an August 15, 2016 article:
washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoin…

9) The Isikoff interview took place on July 18, 2016.

Unknown at the time, the matter had also captured the attention of another player in the SpyGate saga, dossier author Christopher Steele, who had begun publishing a series of memos beginning on June 20, 2016.

10) Contained within an Aug. 10, 2016 memo was this bit of information:

“Kremlin engaging with several high profile US players, including STEIN, PAGE and (former DIA Director Michael Flynn) and funding their recent visits to Moscow"

11) Steele: "a Kremlin official involved in US relations commented on aspects of the Russian operation to date...This had involved the Kremlin supporting various US political figures, including funding indirectly their recent visits to Moscow."

12) Steele:

"S/he named a delegation from Lyndon LAROUCHE; presidential candidate JILL STEIN of the Green Party; TRUMP foreign policy advisor Carter PAGE; and former DIA Director Michael Flynn, in this regard and as successful in terms of perceived outcomes.”

13) All other names are CAPITALIZED in the manner of intelligence briefings.

Flynn's name is not capitalized and one case appears within parentheses.

Almost as if his name was suddenly added at the last minute—and by someone other than Steele.

14) Steele met with Isikoff in Sept. 2016 and gave Isikoff information from the dossier.

The resulting Sept. 23rd, article from Isikoff was then cited by the FBI as validating Steele’s claims and was featured in both the original FISA application and three subsequent renewals.

15) Steele was not the only person Isikoff was working with.

On April 26, 2016, Isikoff published a story about Manafort’s business dealings with Oleg Deripaska.

It was later learned from a DNC email leaked by Wikileaks that Isikoff had been working with Alexandra Chalupa.

16) Chalupa met with officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in an effort to expose ties between Trump, Manafort, and Russia.

The obvious question remains.

How did the information on Flynn make its way into the dossier at the time it did, and who provided the information to Steele.

17) @jsolomonReports of The Hill published an article which contained some enlightening information regarding steps Flynn both before and after his trip to Russia:
thehill.com/opinion/white-…

18) "Before Flynn made his infamous December 2015 trip to Moscow — as a retired general and then-adviser to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign — he alerted his former employer, the DIA."

19) "He then attended a “defensive” or “protective” briefing before he ever sat alongside Vladimir Putin at the Russia Today (RT) dinner, or before he talked with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

20) "The briefing educated and sensitized Flynn to possible efforts by his Russian host to compromise the former high-ranking defense official and prepared him for conversations in which he could potentially extract intelligence for U.S. agencies such as the DIA."

21) "When Flynn returned from Moscow, he spent time briefing intelligence officials on what he learned during the Moscow contacts. Between two and nine intelligence officials attended the various meetings with Flynn about the RT event, and the information was moderately useful."

22) "Flynn’s attendance at the RT event was disclosed in advance to the intelligence community, he took proactive steps to ensure he could not be compromised by attendees, and he then came back to the United States and reported intelligence designed to benefit America."

23) Flynn’s actively attending pre- and post-briefings with the DIA on the event, are hardly the actions of a man who was sympathetic to Russia.

24) Solomon references a classified briefing that was given to Grassley and the Senate Judiciary Committee in May 2017, followed by an Aug. 25, 2017 letter that Grassley sent to then-Secretary of Defense General Mattis and then-Director of the DIA, Lt. General Victor Stewart.

25) “On May 25, 2017, DIA personnel provided the Judiciary Committee a classified briefing and an in camera review of classified documents related to Lt. General Michael Flynn. I am writing to request that you declassify a key piece of information from that briefing."

26) “Based on representations made by DIA personnel, it appears the public release of this information would not pose any ongoing risk to national security.

Moreover, the declassification would be in the public interest, and is in the interest of fairness to Lt. General Flynn.”

27) Solomon asserts that info regarding Flynn’s DIA briefings are the exculpatory information contained within the DIA docs.

Perhaps this is correct, but most of this information had previously been made public by Flynn’s attorney and had been reported in multiple news articles.

28) It’s true that initially Flynn’s trip was reported as not having been approved.

Politico reported in Feb '17 that the “Pentagon has informed lawmakers that there are no records of former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s 2015 trip to Moscow."
politico.com/story/2017/02/…

29) The article cited a February 16, 2017 letter sent by then-House oversight committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz and the ranking Democrat on the committee, Elijah Cummings, which noted the following:
democrats-oversight.house.gov/sites/democrat…

30) The accusation by Chaffetz & Cummings that Flynn had not sought permission, although later proven false, came at a crucial juncture in the growing claims of collusion between the Trump admin and Russia.

Flynn had resigned just three days prior to the article’s publication.

31) The letter sent by Chaffetz & Cummings was based on a response letter from the Secretary of the Army, Robert Speer, who was responding on behalf of General Mattis to an earlier letter sent on Feb. 1, 2017 to Mattis by Cummings, Conyers, Schiff, Smith,Thompson and Engel.

32) The Feb. 1, 2017 letter did not focus on whether Flynn had requested DIA approval to attend the event, but instead focused on whether payments received by Flynn were in potential violation of the Emoluments Clause.

33) Nowhere within the Feb 1 letter was a question raised about Flynn obtaining permission for the visit.

Question two asked about interactions with RT officials but did not address anything in relation to Flynn obtaining permission to attend the event.
scribd.com/document/33814…

34) The response letter from Speer was short & direct:

Secretary of Defense James Mattis asked me to respond on his behalf to your February 1, 2017 letter requesting documents pertaining to a possible violation of the Emoluments Clause by retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn

35) "Based on a request from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Department of the Army has conducted a thorough records search, and has not found any documents responsive to your request."

36) The response by Speer in regards to notification of payments received by Flynn was then translated in the Feb. 16 letter sent by Chaffetz and Cummings to mean that no notification was provided by Flynn in regards to his RT Moscow trip

37) “The Department “has not found any documents” indicating that Lieutenant General Flynn requested permission for his speaking engagement with RT in December 2015 OR reported payments he received.”

38) This was later proven to be demonstrably false.

Flynn MAY not have reported the payments but he certainly notified DIA of his pending trip.

On April 25, 2017, Flynn’s lawyer, Robert Kelner, reiterated that Flynn disclosed his Moscow trip to the DIA before he traveled there:

39) "General Flynn briefed the Defense Intelligence Agency, a component agency of the DoD, extensively regarding the RT speaking event trip both before and after the trip, and he answered any questions that were posed by the DIA concerning the trip during those briefings."

40) The fact that Flynn had indeed disclosed his Moscow trip in advance to the DIA ended up widely reported in late April 2017.

But the focus now shifted to Flynn’s [potential] lack of disclosure on the speaking fees he had received.

41) But there was an admission regarding payments:

“One official said there is no specific question on the relevant form that covers payments for speeches by foreign entities, but another said Flynn was told that any payments in connection with the trip were to be disclosed.”

42) Worth asking, in a series of pre and post briefings before the DIA, what are the odds that a question over Flynn receiving any form of payment for his visit did not arise?

A lack of verbal acknowledgement of payment seems extremely unlikely.

43) To my knowledge, Chaffetz and Cummings never corrected the material errors contained within their Feb. 16, 2017 letter.

They simply switched and refined their focus to the matter of payments received by Flynn.

44) On April 19, 2017, Chaffetz surprised Washington by abruptly announcing he would not seek re-election in 2018.

The following day, on April 20th, Chaffetz told KSL Newsradio’s Doug Wright that he might not finish out his term.

Chaffetz formally left Congress on June 30, 2017

45) Worth noting again is the simple fact that Flynn’s briefings to the DIA were publicly known in late April 2017.

The DIA classified briefing given to Grassley on May 25, 2017 came a full month after it was widely known that Flynn had informed the DIA of his Moscow visit.

46) So what was contained within those briefing documents that prompted Grassley to follow up three months later with his August 25, 2017 letter asking General Mattis to “declassify a key piece of information from that briefing.”

And why did Mattis deny that request.

47) It’s possible that Solomon is correct and details contained within the briefing provide a more detailed elaboration of the manner in which Flynn went about notifying the DIA.

But the response from Flynn’s lawyer in April 2017 was already reasonably detailed and specific.

48) Given the unusual and highly politicized sequence of events, it's hard not wonder if there’s not something more contained within those DIA documents Grassley wanted to see released.

49) Flynn’s 2015 Moscow visit was initially used to implicate the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.

It was then used to cast doubts on Flynn’s ability as Trump’s Security Advisor.

Following Flynn’s resignation it was used as a means to pursue the ongoing collusion narrative.

50) Flynn would resign from his position as National Security Advisor in February 2017.

The sequence of events leading to his resignation were both coordinated and orchestrated with Acting Attorney General Sally Yates playing a leading role.

51) As far as I can tell, Flynn's greatest issue/liability lay with his Turkish lobbying.

But that discussion will have to be saved for a separate thread.

52) A timeline of events surrounding Flynn's resignation is included in article.

With Flynn gone and the Russian narrative firmly established, attention was turned to President Trump’s newly confirmed Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

53) On the same day as Sessions’s recusal, former dep assist sec of defense Evelyn Farkas detailed efforts at hampering the Trump Administration during a MSNBC interview.

She described how the Obama administration gathered and disseminated intelligence on the Trump team.

54) “I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill … ‘Get as much information as you can. Get as much intelligence as you can before President Obama leaves the administration.’

55) “The Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff’s dealing with Russians, [they] would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we would no longer have access to that intelligence. … That’s why you have the leaking.”

56) Note that Farkas said “how we knew” not “what we knew.”

A crucial distinction.
/End