Barr Installs Outside Prosecutor to Review Case Against Michael Flynn, Ex-Trump Adviser

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See I thought the NSA wasn’t supposed to be a compromised traitor. I thought that was how it worked.

Then if that was the case, why wasn't he charged with that? Why the "no derogatory information" declaration from the FBI?

He’s gotten kid gloves from the start, and it still is too much for the Trumpisphere. They can not have consequences.

"No derogatory information"....means no derogatory information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See I thought the NSA wasn’t supposed to be a compromised traitor. I thought that was how it worked.

Then if that was the case, why wasn't he charged with that? Why the "no derogatory information" declaration from the FBI?

He’s gotten kid gloves from the start, and it still is too much for the Trumpisphere. They can not have consequences.

"No derogatory information"....means no derogatory information.

Actually, for people who know English, it means no derogatory information now known.

Flynn is a lying liar who lied to the wrong people. The love for him is so sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See I thought the NSA wasn’t supposed to be a compromised traitor. I thought that was how it worked.

Then if that was the case, why wasn't he charged with that? Why the "no derogatory information" declaration from the FBI?

He’s gotten kid gloves from the start, and it still is too much for the Trumpisphere. They can not have consequences.

"No derogatory information"....means no derogatory information.

Actually, for people who know English, it means no derogatory information now known.

Flynn is a lying liar who lied to the wrong people. The love for him is so sad.

Correct...except you forgot "after the Crossfire Razor investigation". Fixed it for you.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

The "knows nothing about it" refers to the lawsuit/appeal/amicus brief.

Seriously, It's one of the questions no Trump conspiracy theorist can explain: why did Obama try to *warn* Trump, if he was trying to *hurt* him?

Obama and everyone KNEW he was under investigation because he was conspiring with the Turks, the Israelis and the Russians.

Chris Christie knew it and tried to warn Trump too, and for his trouble, Javanka tossed him out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That didn't age well

[Anonymous]

The CBS reporter tweeted out the list of those who requested unmasking. The comments on the tweet are ridiculous.

Why did energy need to know? because Flynn was trying to sell nuclear secrets.

Why did the Italian Ambassador need to know? Because that is where a lot of the meetings, including Papadopolous, took place.

this isn't some nefarious ploy by the Obama administration. It was law enforcement and counterintelligance doing its freaking job.

Obama WARNED Trump. It's almost like Obama had the care of the country in mind and trump hired Flynn to spite Obama.

Well that worked out. If people want the truth, the truth is going to come out, and it won't work very well for Trump, or the Trump loyalists, no matter HOW they try to spin it.

[Anonymous]

According to the DNI, NSA received these amounts of Signal Intelligence "unmasking" requests per year:

2016: 9200
2017: 9500
2018: 17000
2019: 10000

Something very odd was happening in 2018. Who was in the White House then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The CBS reporter tweeted out the list of those who requested unmasking. The comments on the tweet are ridiculous.

Why did energy need to know? because Flynn was trying to sell nuclear secrets.

Why did the Italian Ambassador need to know? Because that is where a lot of the meetings, including Papadopolous, took place.

this isn't some nefarious ploy by the Obama administration. It was law enforcement and counterintelligance doing its freaking job.

Obama WARNED Trump. It's almost like Obama had the care of the country in mind and trump hired Flynn to spite Obama.

Well that worked out. If people want the truth, the truth is going to come out, and it won't work very well for Trump, or the Trump loyalists, no matter HOW they try to spin it.

Questions I have......

If the Italian Ambassador did not already know who the unmasked person was, why make an unmasking request? This phone call had NOTHING to do with Italy.
Which one of these people leaked the call to David Ignatius? This is essentially a suspect list for the only crime here. A felony.
If the Obama admin was so worried about Flynn and his influence, why didn't the FBI give Trump a defensive briefing? The only "briefing" he got was about the salacious part of the fake dossier.
If Flynn was "trying to sell nuclear secrets," why wasn't he charged with this?

Rumor has it that Flynn is only the tip of the iceberg. Things are about to get much worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The CBS reporter tweeted out the list of those who requested unmasking. The comments on the tweet are ridiculous.

Why did energy need to know? because Flynn was trying to sell nuclear secrets.

Why did the Italian Ambassador need to know? Because that is where a lot of the meetings, including Papadopolous, took place.

this isn't some nefarious ploy by the Obama administration. It was law enforcement and counterintelligance doing its freaking job.

Obama WARNED Trump. It's almost like Obama had the care of the country in mind and trump hired Flynn to spite Obama.

Well that worked out. If people want the truth, the truth is going to come out, and it won't work very well for Trump, or the Trump loyalists, no matter HOW they try to spin it.

Questions I have......

If the Italian Ambassador did not already know who the unmasked person was, why make an unmasking request? This phone call had NOTHING to do with Italy. many of the meetings took place in italy
Which one of these people leaked the call to David Ignatius? This is essentially a suspect list for the only crime here. A felony.
If the Obama admin was so worried about Flynn and his influence, why didn't the FBI give Trump a defensive briefing? They did, in August of 2016. Trump tossed it back in their faces, which raised the alarms even more. The only "briefing" he got was about the salacious part of the fake dossier. Not true, see August 2016, when he demonstrated he could not be trusted. The IC was trying to make sure he didn't have people on his staff trying to undermine him and he defended them vigorously.
If Flynn was "trying to sell nuclear secrets," why wasn't he charged with this?Because they tried to flip him and for a while, he was a cooperating witness, until he wasn't. By then, Barr was in place and the effery with the new lawyers started, with trump's approval

Rumor has it that Flynn is only the tip of the iceberg. Things are about to get much worse. for Trump, yes.

[Anonymous]

This explains the issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to the DNI, NSA received these amounts of Signal Intelligence "unmasking" requests per year:

2016: 9200
2017: 9500
2018: 17000
2019: 10000

Something very odd was happening in 2018. Who was in the White House then?

In a briefing with reporters, Alex Joel, the office’s chief civil liberties officer, cautioned against reading too much into statistical fluctuations, but said that one factor in the surge of unmaskings was that a handful of reports in 2018 contained numerous identifiers of Americans or American businesses that malicious hackers abroad had targeted.

“That could be an important factor in explaining the number here,” Mr. Joel said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/us/politics/nsa-unmaskings-surveillance-report.html

[Anonymous]

So when are we going to start wondering why Flynn called Kislyak and then lied about it? It wasn't at Trump's direction or that would've eventually come out.

Was it on his own? Or someone else's direction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Questions I have......

If the Italian Ambassador did not already know who the unmasked person was, why make an unmasking request? This phone call had NOTHING to do with Italy.
Which one of these people leaked the call to David Ignatius? This is essentially a suspect list for the only crime here. A felony.
If the Obama admin was so worried about Flynn and his influence, why didn't the FBI give Trump a defensive briefing? The only "briefing" he got was about the salacious part of the fake dossier.
If Flynn was "trying to sell nuclear secrets," why wasn't he charged with this?

Rumor has it that Flynn is only the tip of the iceberg. Things are about to get much worse.

The unmasking request came BEFORE the Kislyak calls. That is because Five Eyes and US intel caught conversations between Russians and <American>, Turks and <American> Saudis and <American> Israeli's and <American> - it is the job of the appropriate people in the IC and in the ranks of the diplomatic corps, to understand WHO might be conspiring against them. If Grennell is going to release this information, then he MUST release the recordings of the calls, so there is full transparency as to what Flynn was discussing and with whom. None of the selective BS with attached innuendo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The "knows nothing about it" refers to the lawsuit/appeal/amicus brief.

Seriously, It's one of the questions no Trump conspiracy theorist can explain: why did Obama try to *warn* Trump, if he was trying to *hurt* him?

Obama and everyone KNEW he was under investigation because he was conspiring with the Turks, the Israelis and the Russians.

Chris Christie knew it and tried to warn Trump too, and for his trouble, Javanka tossed him out.

The Obama administration was desperate to get Flynn out. That's why. Once the Crossfire Razor investigation produced no derogatory information, they had to come up with something.