Unmasking? The Real Story Is When Flynn Was Not Masked in the First Place

Unmasking? The Real Story Is When Flynn Was Not Masked in the First Place

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/michael-flynn-unmasking-real-story-is-when-he-was-not-masked-in-the-first-place/

Excerpt: ...we know that participants in that meeting already knew about Flynn’s identity as Kislyak’s interlocutor. The exhibits attached to the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the Flynn case relate that Comey’s deputy, Andrew McCabe, knew about it no later than January 3, the day he briefed Mary McCord, who ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division. Plus, Yates recalled being surprised that Obama already knew about the Flynn–Kislyak call (and, in fact, is the one who told Yates about it). Clearly, the news had been percolating at the highest levels of the Obama administration for at least a couple of days, although it may not yet have made its way down to Joe Pientka, the FBI case agent on Trump–Russia, who on January 4 signed off on a memo closing the FBI’s Flynn counterintelligence investigation (“Crossfire Razor”). To summarize, the list provided by Grenell indicates no unmasking of Flynn between December 28 (the day before the call) and January 5, even though news of Flynn’s identification was already circulating on January 3 (when McCabe briefed McCord about it). (...) Maybe Flynn was a FISA surveillance target. That is, his interception was not incidental. Rather, the FBI was monitoring him under FISA because he was a suspected agent of a foreign power — the theory based on which the bureau opened their counterintelligence investigation of Flynn in August 2016. But that can’t be right. (...) It is more likely, then, that the Flynn–Kislyak call was captured by intelligence operations that are not governed by FISA. (...)  Interesting thing about that: Flynn was not in the United States on December 29, 2016. He was taking a short vacation in the Dominican Republic. Where was Kislyak when they spoke? I don’t know. [McCarthy almost always has his facts correct. This would explain an awful lot of things, wouldn’t it? A call originating outside the USA to a destination outside the USA wouldn’t fall under FISA, would it? Suppose the call was intercepted by a friendly foreign intel service who then passed it on o a US agency. It never would’ve been masked to begin with, though the whole thing would be held very, very securely–except someone who saw it passed it higher because of a known interest. Which makes me wonder just when the White House really started to worry about Flynn and the Trump campaign. Might it have been MUCH earlier, perhaps as early as 2015? This is the most unsettling thing I’ve heard in a long time. I added emphasis. Ron P.]