1. Quick thread to emphasize yesterday's inflection point and with it outline the obvious Intel Community motives of long term surveillance admissions on the Trump campaign. 
2. First to the inflection point. After 18 months of lies, professional obfuscation, and some flat out denials, notice the DOJ-NSD (Sally Yates, Mary McCord) are admitting to their surveillance programs on candidate Trump. nytimes.com/2018/05/16/us/…
3. FYI, Acting AG Sally Yates and National Security Division head Mary McCord are the two Obama DOJ officials who went to the White House post Flynn interview to tell WH Counsel (Don McGhan) the issues they had w/ Flynn.
4. After 18 months of "denial" the Scheme Team narrative has switched to "justification". That's the inflection point.
5. During the FBI/DOJ-NSD lying and denial phase everything was intentionally shaped to the media via *anonymous source* leaks. ie. "people familiar with the matter", "government sources", "former officials with knowledge of the matter" etc. etc.
6. However, during the admission/*justification* phase, those same leaking officials start putting their names 'on the record'. Really, they have no choice - they are exposed by upcoming facts (OIG report etc.), and now they need to shape narrative via justification approach.
7. Justification means admitting to a much longer history of conduct, and shaping the reasons for engaging in that conduct.
8. Spying and opposition research on political opponents (formerly denied, now admitted) MUST BE turned into national security surveillance and prudent monitoring.
9. DOJ-NSD (Nat Sec. Division), and FBI now enter a phase where they are justifying actions that go back much, much longer on the timeline than previously exposed in the lying, denial and obfuscation phase.
10. One of those admissions begins today with Mike Flynn under U.S. government surveillance going back to 2015. 🤔 Why. Why make that admission now? Well...
11. Everything we've been sharing for the past 18 months, previously denied, is now coming into the sunlight - they cannot avoid, they must now admit, and as a consequence they must now attempt to justify. It all goes back to this: scribd.com/document/34954…
12. 2015 and 2016 opposition research and surveillance on the Trump campaign (and others) through the use of FBI and NSA databases by political operatives (ie. contractors) granted access to those databases.
13. Those "contractors" were outside government entities. Remember Daniel Richman, James Comey's BFF leaker buddy, and special status unpaid employee with FBI authorized government access to databases? Remember him?
15. And those contractors are doing what? They are using access to FBI and NSA databases to conduct unauthorized searches. "About Queries" (17) and "To/From Queries" (16). Manipulating FISA-702 authority to conduct political surveillance and oppo research.
16. So it stands to reason in the *justification phase*, those who were previously denying their involvement, and are exposed by the sunlight of fact-centric investigative findings, have to come up with plausible explanations for that which they previously denied.
17. It's not a complex dynamic to understand. It's the traditional illegal act, cover-up, denial, evidence surfaces, get busted, can no longer deny, now need to justify story.
18. But they are going to have a problem. I'll quickly explain.
But first..... Who's they? Them. All of them:
But first..... Who's they? Them. All of them:
19. The most transparently obvious problem is: how do the FBI and DOJ justify massive and intrusive surveillance on Mike Flynn and Paul Manafort for contacts with Russian entities, individuals, and organizations....
20. ....and simultaneously overlook even stronger connections to Russian organizations, government officials, entities, individuals and organizations by Bill Clinton, John Podesta and candidate Hillary Clinton herself?
21. If contacts with sketchy Russians is the litmus test to initiate surveillance, how the hell does the FBI and DOJ reconcile skipping all of the Russian interests of John and Tony Podesta.
22. That's just one example. There are hundreds of more hypocritical examples that prove the political motives of a targeted effort by the DOJ-NSD and FBI to conduct weaponized political campaign surveillance. But you get the picture....
23. At least we've gotten beyond the *denials* and have entered the *justification* phase. This is the phase where all those hypocritical and irreconcilable examples will put the usurping agents, and their media co-horts, on their heels.
/END
/END
