Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-17?

Moderators: DrVolin, Wombaticus Rex, Jeff

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby Karmamatterz » Tue Feb 14, 2017 6:09 pm


You did hear what Reagan did to Carter?
You did hear what Nixon did to Johnson?
You did hear about the Forged Niger Docs?


Funny that those must have slipped your mind just couldn't go back that far in time? :jumping:

Forged Niger Docs wasn't that long ago.. you must have heard about those...but they were created by Ledeen and crew so I suppose you could just overlook that history lesson and they really don't fit your narrative

trumpty dumbty has ties to the Russian mob...stick that in your hat


good to get to know you better..now I know who I am dealing with...my first impression of you was correct..I should ALWAYS go with my first impressions

damn I was right about you..I should have accepted your first post to me for what it was ...a personal VICIOUS attack and not you're measly attempted excuse at brushing it off..."oh I didn't mean it that way"

hello .....the 1980's want their OLD news back

this is 2017 .......this is happening now and we are talking about the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND HIS TIES WITH RUSSIA .....YOU KNOW LIKE
MONEY.... DEBT AND BLACKMAIL

AND ACTUAL REAL LIFE NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE


Yup, I heard (and read) about Reagan, Nixon and Niger. Did it slip my mind that Bill Casey was making secret trips and communicating with Khomeini? NO.
But you made that assumption. Fact is I had to get to work this morning and didn't have all day to dig up more. Some folks have a lot more time on their hands, good for them. I just posted one that stood out as it really hasn't got much press or discussion here. It's largely trivia injected in-between pasta salad.

Do you know me? You don't know jack shit about me. Apparently you also think I'm a Trump supporter. I just absolutely have to laugh my ass off at that!!! Funny stuff SLAD. Thanks for the laughs. :rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2

I've heard Trump has ties to the Russian mob, but never read any facts that make it clear. Doesn't mean those facts don't exist, just haven't read them or been interested. Frankly, why would I? Like all the president, many in Congress and a lot of bureaucrats, they are evil. They have their own mob(s). The entire establishment is one giant mob. Trump just speaks a different language and uses his own forms of propaganda and lies differently. This was discussed before. Other presidents that have committed heinous acts are more suave or professional. Drumpf just comes off like a bully buffoon. I still believe he is a tool for a long term plan that he is merely a pawn in. Trump will end up being so easy to manipulate because of his ego and poor thinking skills that the power brokers are probably laughing their asses off with which methods to go about their continued efforts at global hegemony.

No, I wasn't aware there are members of the Nazi Party in the White House. I am aware that more many decades (and currently) fascists, thugs, neo-cons and all sorts of evil pricks have taken up house and work in that building. It's fun to toss around the word Nazi. I had this discussion with a friend recently when he said the same thing. They may have attributes of the Nazis (fascists), that doesn't make them a true Nazi. There are levels of evil. Apparently it's okay to bomb innocents with drones and sign legislation the strips away our rights and not label those people evil or Nazis. Sigh.....this is getting old pointing out such obvious things.

Just because someone points out something does not make it a binary situation where they are suddenly a fascist or Nazi...or Trump supporter. People need to relax and stop gulping the MSM Kool Aid. The level of hype is just so intense right now it's really getting crazy.
Karmamatterz
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Feb 14, 2017 6:12 pm

what I know about you is your personal attack against me and your attempt at brushing it off ...that's enough


and I didn't have to look up any of that..I didn't even need copy and paste ...right off the top of my head ..anyone should be able to do that in 2 minutes...if they wanted to

just pointing out what YOU think is important to post about


funny you didn't mention AGAIN Niger Forgeries....I know such a long long time ago.. :P


yea right just off the top of your head a democrat Kennedy...give me a break

historical..... :lol: by one bias example

more like hysterical

with all the crap the republicans have done...Nixon...Reagan....Bush ...Bush...Cheney


I say Nazi in the White House because of this...I don't toss it around lightly

Image
seemslikeadream » Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:54 pm wrote:
Image

Why Is Trump Adviser Wearing Medal of Nazi Collaborators?

by Eli Clifton

The White House’s omission of Jewish victims of the Holocaust in its statement for Holocaust Remembrance Day raised objections from Jewish groups across the political spectrum but the Trump administration’s combative defense was perhaps the most surprising move by a presidency facing record low approval numbers. Last Monday, Deputy Assistant to the President Sebastian Gorka refused to admit that that it may have been poor judgement not to specifically acknowledge the suffering of Jews in the Holocaust.

Gorka was an odd choice of proxies for the White House to put forward in defense of its Holocaust Remembrance day statement.

He has appeared in multiple photographs wearing the medal of a Hungarian group listed by the State Department as having collaborated with the Nazis during World War II.

When asked on Monday whether the White House’s Holocaust Remembrance Day statement was “questionable in being the first such statement in many years that didn’t recognize that Jewish extermination was the chief goal of the Holocaust,” Gorka told conservative talk show host Michael Medved:

No, I’m not going to admit it. Because it’s asinine. It’s absurd. You’re making a statement about the Holocaust. Of course it’s about the Holocaust because that’s what the statement’s about. It’s only reasonable to twist it if your objective is to attack the president.
That statement is particularly noteworthy when viewed in the context of Gorka’s apparent affinity for a Hungarian group with a checkered past.

Gorka, who worked in the UK and Hungary before immigrating to the U.S., was photographed at an inaugural ball wearing a medal from the Hungarian Order of Heroes, Vitezi Rend, a group listed by the State Department as taking direction from Germany’s Nazi government during World War II.

Gorka did not respond to a request for comment but appeared to be wearing the medal on his chest during the Trump inauguration ball and in an undated photo posted on his Facebook page.

Image

Image
Hungarian Collaborators

Eva Balogh, founder of the news analysis blog Hungarian Spectrum and former professor of Eastern European History at Yale University, confirmed to LobeLog the identity of the medal worn by Gorka. She said:

Yes, the medal is of the “vitézi rend” established by Miklós Horthy in 1920. He, as a mere governor, didn’t have the privilege to ennoble his subjects as the king could do before 1918, and therefore the “knightly order” he established was a kind of compensation for him. Officers and even enlisted men of exceptional valor could become knights. Between 1920 and 1944 there were 23,000 such knights. The title was inheritable by the oldest son. I found information that makes it clear that Gorka’s father, Pál Gorka, used the title. However, since he was born in 1930 he couldn’t himself be the one “knighted.” So, most likely, it was Gorka’s grandfather who was the original recipient.
Gorka’s PhD dissertation lists his name as “Sebestyén L. v. Gorka,” which suggests that he is carrying on his father’s title, albeit in an abbreviated format, according to Balogh.

Image
The Order of Vitezi
Miklós Horthy, regent of the Kingdom of Hungary from 1920 to 1944, established Vitezi Rend for both civilian and military supporters of Horthy’s government. The group was initially open to non-Jews who served in distinction during World War I.

Although Horthy’s personal views about Jews are still debated, he was explicit in endorsing anti-Semitism even while showing some unease with the pace of the Holocaust. In an October 1940 letter to Prime Minister Pál Teleki, Horthy said:

As regards the Jewish problem, I have been an anti-Semite throughout my life. I have never had contact with Jews. I have considered it intolerable that here in Hungary everything, every factory, bank, large fortune, business, theatre, press, commerce, etc. should be in Jewish hands, and that the Jew should be the image reflected of Hungary, especially abroad. Since, however, one of the most important tasks of the government is to raise the standard of living, i.e., we have to acquire wealth, it is impossible, in a year or two, to replace the Jews, who have everything in their hands, and to replace them with incompetent, unworthy, mostly big-mouthed elements, for we should become bankrupt. This requires a generation at least.
In April 1941, Hungary became a de facto member of the Axis and permitted German troops to cross Hungary for the invasion of Yugoslavia. The first massacres of Jews took place in August when SS troops murdered between 18,000 and 20,000 Jews without Hungarian citizenship after they’d been deported from Hungary to Ukraine.

Image
Horthy and Hitler
By 1944, Horthy may have sought to distance Hungary from Nazi Germany but agreed to deport around 100,000 Jews. The German army removed Horthy from office after it occupied Hungary. Horthy’s actual awareness of the fate of Hungarian Jews remains unclear. But reports by journalists and the State Department in 1942 are explicit about the role played and benefits enjoyed by Vitezi Rend’s members.

A Jewish Telegraph Agency report from October 1942, describes how:

Confiscated Jewish real estate in Hungary will be distributed by the government among members of the “Hungarian Order of Heroes” it was announced today over the Budapest radio. The order consists of soldiers who distinguished themselves in the last World War or in the present war.
“In 1942 there was a so-called ‘land reform,’” said Balogh. “It actually meant the expropriation of agricultural lands owned by Jewish citizens. According to government propaganda this move was necessary to ease social tensions in the countryside but as a recent study (2015) shows, most of the land went to “loyal, middle-class supporters of the regime, among them members of the ‘vitézi rend.’”

A Checkered Legacy

The State Department lists the Order of Heroes as an organization that was “under the direction of the Nazi government of Germany.” Membership in such groups during World War II could make individuals ineligible for U.S. visas. The State Department’s website warns that membership in groups under this designation:

[R]enders ineligible for a visa any alien who participated in the persecution of any person because of race, religion, national origin, or political opinion during the period from March 23, 1933, to May 8, 1945, under the direction of or in association with the Nazi Government of Germany or an allied or occupied government.
Vitezi Rend was banned during the Soviet occupation of Hungary but reestablished in exile. The order was awarded to members of the Hungarian diaspora and individuals in Hungary since 1983. Although appearing to largely promote Hungarian culture and the diaspora, it sought foreign donors to help fund the construction of a statue of Horthy in 2011. A fundraising document read, “We have decided after almost seven decades to erect a statue in honor of our beloved Regent and to remember him, therefore we ask for your support!”

“In post-World War II Hungary, no noble titles of any sort can be officially used,” said Balogh. “The ‘knightly order’ no longer officially exists. However, right-wing émigrés kept the order going abroad.”

She later added, “Many supporters of the Horthy regime were enamored by the Nazis and Hitler and the ‘knights’ were especially so. Put it that way, after 1948 one wouldn’t have bragged about his father being a ‘vitéz.’ Lately, however, especially since 2010, it has become fashionable again to boast about such ‘illustrious’ ancestors.”

Horthy, under Hungary’s center-right Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, has undergone a controversial rehabilitation, with squares renamed in his honor and statues erected.

Gorka’s decision to publicly identify with Vitezi Rend raises questions about Trump’s adviser and the administration’s flirtations with anti-Semitism and the alt-right. It’s even more awkward that he’s the person defending the administration’s explicit omission of Jewish victim of the Holocaust from the Holocaust Remembrance Day statement.
http://lobelog.com/why-is-trump-adviser ... aborators/



Priebus, Flynn, others on thin ice

Andrew Harnik / AP
Imagine you're Reince Priebus. Every day, you hear speculation that your days as White House chief of staff are numbered. You wake up on a Sunday and read that colleague Kellyanne Conway's dream job is, well, yours.

Then, you flick on CNN to see Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy — a Trump pal of 10 years (and Mar-a-Lago member) who just spent time alone with him in Florida — saying this on "Reliable Sources": "The White House is showing not the amount of order that we need to see. I think there's a lot of weakness coming out of the chief of staff."

After a pleading call from Priebus, Ruddy tweeted: "Reince just briefed me on new WH plans. Impressive! CNN today my personal view. Told him I have 'open mind' based on his results." Then Ruddy got another call: "Jared Kushner tells me COS Reince is doing 'amazing job.'"

Not a reassuring end to your third week on the job!

But this is a problem hardly confined to Priebus: After watching Trump clean house several times during the campaign, everyone feels on thin ice. This naturally breeds insecurity, ass-covering and endless leaking. Those who don't fear for their hide are busy gaming out how they rise when someone falls. Trump feeds all of this. It's why an insider describes the White House hierarchy as "fragile."

"These people are insecure because Trump does not respect them," said a person in constant contact with the West Wing. "He does not because they have not made any money. He respects [Stephen] Bannon and Gary Cohn because they are financially successful."

Trump has already consulted friends about his next chief of staff. I'm told that to avoid admitting error, Trump plans a smooth transition from Priebus (could be a year), perhaps by making him a Cabinet secretary!

Trump is trying to figure out who he should trust. This is totally new for him, so he's trying to figure out who the strong ones are and who the weak ones are.
— Chris Ruddy, in a phone interview with Axios

Heather Nauert, the news anchor on "Fox & Friends," was spotted at the White House last week — talking to Trump, we're told, about a communications job. Yesterday she tweeted that she's buying Ivanka Trump shoes in solidarity after Nordstrom dropped the line, and will wear them on "Fox & Friends" this week.

That certainly doesn't make embattled West Wing officials feel any more secure as they try to put out what one called "400 fires a day."

Any purge will begin with national security adviser Mike Flynn, for lying to Vice President Pence about contacts with Russia on sanctions. In retrospect, that was clear as soon as Trump told reporters on Air Force One on Friday that he didn't know about the story, which had been on the front page of that morning's Washington Post. It was a way for Trump to dodge showing support for Flynn.

"Spread the butter: He is toast," said a top source. "Lying to Pence damaged Pence's credibility and the administration's. That is an unpardonable sin."
https://www.axios.com/priebus-flynn-oth ... 44334.html



Karmamatterz » Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:41 am wrote:Some historical perspective on this situation:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/10/ted ... elections/

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/kgb- ... er-to-ussr

There is always a good laugh (we need humor) with all these shenanigans. One has to wonder if there is cognitive dissonance at play or did everybody forget what Senator Ted Kennedy did?

Asking the Soviets to intervene in U.S. elections? Tut tut.... cluck cluck
Last edited by seemslikeadream on Tue Feb 14, 2017 6:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby Karmamatterz » Tue Feb 14, 2017 6:31 pm

Like I wrote, some people have more time. Some more than others. Glad you have a fresh memory of all those, they are not hard to forget. The list has rather been beaten to death quite well, which is why I mentioned Kennedy. I could give a fu*k if he is a Democrat. If you've really read my limited posts you would know I don't distinguish much between the two major mob parties in Amerika. I do recall the entire WMD fiasco and how the MSM, which included all the broadcast networks, cable, the NY Times and Washington Post all joined in on the fun and repeated the BS lies from the Bush wackers and their crony neo-con cohorts. I name Wapo and the Times as they are complicit in the treachery (fake news) brought down on us, but they are often used by liberals and the left to feel good and make the average reader believe they are to be trusted. Sigh.....

My colleagues in the biz are blinded by what fake news really is. What's just as demoralizing about this is they are not honest enough to admit it's a gift that's been handed to them (establishment media).
Karmamatterz
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Feb 14, 2017 6:34 pm

unbelievable that you are not fully aware of the Forged Niger Docs..the made up shit that got us into the Iraq War

The name Valerie Plame mean anything to you? Joe Wilson?

no wonder you had to go back and dig up an old Kennedy story


but your memory of an 30 year old story is so fresh

I am well aware of your posts


Here I have some links for you

AMERICAN JUDAS 2nd Edition: INVESTIGATE CHENEY & UNRAVEL
Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:23 pm

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11135&p=109556#p109556





Not So Subtle October Surprise Admission from Ledeen?

seemslikeadream » Mon Apr 25, 2016 6:01 pm wrote:LEDEEN!

The belief in a single voice that governs the public should cause all Americans to understand these men want to convert this nation to a permanent dictatorship. Their inspirer was Leo Strauss, a professor who taught Machiavellian methods to many of them at the University of Chicago. In fact, Paul Wolfovitz earned his doctorate under Strauss and many of the neo-cons in the White House studied under him. Strauss believed every society needs a “single public orthodoxy.” As Drury put it, “a set of ideas that defines what is true and false, right and wrong, noble and base.” Strauss believed that the role of religion was indispensable to the political success of a nation. For a political society had to hold together and act as a unit in lock step with the leader. Strauss believed that religion was the means to inculcate the desired ideas into the minds of the masses. He didn’t care what religion—just as long as it was a religion that could link itself to the political order.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 89x1612651

LEDEEN!
Posted by seemslikeadream on Sat Aug-18-07 09:29 AM
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/archives ... tml#008117

HADLEY NAMED. La Repubblica has a dynamite series this week on the origin of the yellowcake forgeries. Laura Rozen reports:
With Patrick Fitzgerald widely expected to announce indictments in the CIA leaks investigation, questions are again being raised about the murky matter that first led to the appointment of the special counsel: namely, how the Bush White House came into possession of discredited Italian intelligence reports claiming that Iraq sought uranium "yellowcake" from Niger.
The key documents supposedly proving the Iraqi attempt turned out to be crude forgeries on official stationery stolen from the African nation's Rome embassy. Among the most tantalizing aspects of the debate over the Iraq War is the origin of those fake documents and the role of the Italian intelligence services in disseminating them.

In an explosive series of articles appearing this week in the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, investigative reporters Carlo Bonini and Giuseppe d'Avanzo reveal how Niccolo Pollari, chief of Italy's military intelligence service, known as SISMI, brought the Niger yellowcake story directly to the White House after his insistent overtures had been rejected by the Central Intelligence Agency in 2001 and 2002.

Today's exclusive report in La Repubblica reveals that Pollari met secretly in Washington on September 9, 2002, with then–Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Their secret meeting came at a critical moment in the White House campaign to convince Congress and the American public that war in Iraq was necessary to prevent Saddam Hussein from developing nuclear weapons.

The La Repubblica article quotes a Bush administration official saying, "I can confirm that on September 9, 2002, general Nicolo Pollari met Stephen Hadley."

Laura will have more on this story later today.


and this



JANUARY 2001 BREAK-IN AT NIGER EMBASSY

At night, between the first and second of the January 2001, a mysterious thief came to the embassy of Niger in Rome and into the residence of the counselor in charge. It turned out that some letterhead and seals (see photocopy) were missing. A second dossier on Niger-Iraq trade soon came into Martino’s hands, one that included references to uranium trafficking. Martino claims he got it from embassy personnel and that he thought it was authentic.


http://nuralcubicle.blogspot.com/2005/1 ... wcake.html

Double-Dealers and Dilettantes--the Men Behind Nigergate Were All Italians.

The military intervention in Iraq was justified by two revelations: Saddam Hussein attempted to acquire unprocessed uranium (yellowcake) in Niger (1) for enrichment with centrifuges built with aluminum tubes imported from Europe(2). The fabricators of the twin hoaxes (there was never any trace in Iraq of unprocessed uranium or centrifuges) were the Italian government and Italian military intelligence. La Repubblica has attempted to reconstruct the who, where and why of the manufacture and transfer to British and American intelligence of the dodgy dossier for war.

They are the same two hoaxes that Judith Miller, the reporter who betrayed her newspaper, published (together with Michael Gordon) on September 8, 2002. In a lengthy investigative piece for the New York Times, Miller reported that Saddam could have built an atomic weapon with those aluminum tubes. These were the goods that the hawks in the Bush administration were expecting.

The "war dance" which followed Judith Miller’s scoop seemed like "carefully-prepared theater” to an attentive media-watcher, Roberto Reale of Ultime Notizie (The Latest News).

Condoleezza Rice, who was then White House Security Advisor, said on CNN: We don’t want the smoking gun to look like a mushroom cloud. A menacing Dick Cheney told Meet the Press that We know with absolute certainty that Saddam is using his technical and commercial capacities to acquire the material necessary to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon. This was the beginning of an escalation of fear.

26 September 2002: Colin Powell warns the Senate: The Iraqi attempt to acquire uranium is proof of its nuclear ambitions.

19 December 2002: The information on Niger and the uranium is included in the three-page President’s Daily Briefing prepared each day by the CIA and the Department of State for George W. Bush. The ambassador to the United Nations, John Negroponte, added his stamp of approval: Why is Iraq dissimulating its purchase of Niger uranium?

more

http://crookedtimber.org/2005/10/25/la-repubblica-scoop

....

It’s a fact that on the eve of the Iraq war, and under the supervision of the diplomatic advisor to the Foreign Ministry, Gianni Castellaneta (today ambassador to the USA), the director of SISMI organized his agenda in Washington with the staff of Condoleeza Rice, who was National Security Adviser to the White House at that time. La Repubblica is able to document this two track process between the government and Italian intelligence. At least one of these ‘barely official’ meetings of Pollari’s was, according to secret service agents, the ‘creation of a system’ that would bring together government, intelligence and public affairs .

To summarize: Nicolo Pollari’s SISMI wanted to substantiate the the Iraqi acquisition of raw uranium to build a nuclear bomb. The game-plan was rather transparent. ‘Authentic’ documents relating to an attempted acquisition in Niger (old Italian intelligence from the 1980’s) were the dowry of the second-in-command of CISMI’s Roman headquarters (Antonio Nucera). They were bundled together with another fabricated document … through a simulated burglary on the Nigerien embassy (from which they had gotten headed notepaper and seals). The documents were shown by Pollari’s men to CIA station agents, and at the same time, a SISMI ‘postman’ by the name of Rocco Martino was sent to Sir Richard Dearlove of MI6 in London.

turning to the second chapter of the Great Swindle, organized in Italy, to build the case that military intervention in Iraq was necessary. … the Italian report on uranium …

… The CIA analysts thought the first report ‘very limited’ and ‘without the necessary details.’ INR analysts in the Department of State assessed the information as ‘highly suspect.’ … The immediate impact on the American Intelligence community wasn’t very gratifying for Pollari … Gianni Castellaneta advised him to look in ‘other directions’ too, while the minister of Defence, Antonio Martino invited him to meet ‘an old friend of Italy’s.’ The American friend was Michael Ledeen, an old fox in the ‘parallel’ intelligence community in the US, who had been declared an undesirable person in our country in the 1980’s . Ledeen was at Rome on behalf of the Office of Special Plans, created at the Pentagon by Paul Wolfowiz to gather intelligence that would support military intervention in Iraq. A source at Forte Braschi told La Repubblica : “Pollari got a frosty reception from the CIA’s station head in Rome, Jeff Castelli, for this information on uranium. Castelli apparently let the matter drop . Pollari got the hint and talked about it with Michael Ledeen.’ We don’t know what Michael Ledeen did in Washington. But at the beginning of 2002, Paul Wolfowitz convinced Dick Cheney that the uranium trail intercepted by the Italians had to be explored top to bottom. The vice-president, as the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence tells it, once again asked the CIA ‘very decisively’ to find out more about the ‘possible acquisition of Nigerien uranium.’ In this meeting, Dick Cheney explicitly said that this piece of intelligence was at the disposition of a “foreign service.”

… Forte Braschi says that “Pollari was incredibly cunning – he knew that it wasn’t enough to rely on the CIA to push the uranium story. It was necessary to work, as Palazzo Chigi and the Department of Defence had indicated, with the Pentagon and with the National Security Adviser, Rice. … An administration official has told La Repubblica “I can confirm that on September 9 2002, General Nicolo Pollari met Stephen Hadley, the deputy to the National Security Adviser, Condoleeza Rice.”… SISMI’s ‘postman,’ Rocco Martino contacted a journalist for a weekly newspaper – edited by Carlo Rossella – to sell her the documents at issue. … Panorama had a worldwide scoop. Title “The War? It’s already begun,’ it spoke of ‘half a ton of uranium.’ … The government asked. The intelligence service gave. The media spread it. The government confirmed it. It was an old disinformation technique from the Cold War. Exaggerate the danger of the threat. Terrify and convince public opinion of it.

more
http://nuralcubicle.blogspot.com/2005/1 ... ction.html


Monday, October 31, 2005
SISMI's War in Iraq: The Iranian Connection

Carlo Bonini and Giuseppi d'Avanzo are at it again. Another three-part blockbuster exposé on the involvement of Italian Military intelligence inside Iraq.

Part I: From Chelabi to Iranian Agents--SISMI's War in Iraq
A strategic summit in Rome with the Pentagon.

ROME: He’s another politico-military intelligence chief. He’s a SISMI man. He makes his way slowly down the narrow hallway of the bar at the Hotel Eden in via Ludovisi. He stops to admire the sky and the attractive skyline of Rome in the April sun (it is 22 April 2003) through the hotel’s large windows. He looks elegant in his Chairman's Committee grisaille. . He selects a table at the center of the terrace. The waiter walks over and solicitously takes his order. The gentleman orders a freshly-squeezed orange juice and a double espresso. The Anglo-American invasion of Iraq began on the night of 19-20 March, thirty-three days earlier.

Today, as Silvio Berlusconi reveals that he never supported the military intervention in Iraq, it is fitting to tell the story of how our country, Italy, although allegedly opposed to war as our Premier now claims, was an active protagonist in war preparations and operations.

We will reveal the different arrangements and plans of action, as well as who planned them and with whom they were planned.

For us Italians, recounts the high-ranking SISMI official to La Repubblica, the war on Iraq was already underway in the days before Christmans, 2002. He smiles. He is animated with a glint of excitement in his eyes and for once seems seems to have no qualms about letting his personal satisfaction slip from behind a frozen mask.

Our man is too disciplined to crow about his successes and too stubborn to be discouraged by defeat. He tells us: It was a novelty, a revolution for our intelligence services. Never before in its history has SISMI been so prominently involved in military ground operations and a major role in planning a war campaign, to boot. The Italian Government? Of course our work was authorized by the Italian Government—are you joking? It was real war, not an exercise! The twenty men we sent to Iraq were risking their lives. He pauses. The espresso arrives. He sips it slowly, his eyes half-closed with satisfaction.

He continues. Twenty men from three SISMI departments were involved: Intelligence, Operations and Counterterrorism. They were divided into small groups which were to operate in and around the areas of Kirkuk, Baghdad and Basrah using outlandish disguises. Each unit was unaware of the identities and the mission of the others. Each unit was ordered to operate within a sector of territory and to work with intelligence “assets” who had already been selected and trained. The objectives were twofold: To identify Iraqi defenses and to evaluate the readiness of the Iraqi armed forces.

If combat was less intense than expected, it is due to the job we did—and we didn’t do it alone. If we won the war before firing a shot, it was due to our successes at infiltration and intelligence-gathering.

The story of Italian military intervention in Iraq begins when the resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, Michael Ledeen, sponsored by Defense Minister Antonio Martino, debarks in Rome with Pentagon men in tow to meet a handful of “Iranian exiles.” The meeting is organized by SISMI. In an Agency “safe house” near Piazza di Spagna (however, other sources have told us it was a reserved room in the Parco dei Principi Hotel).


"Reid: Cheney Obstructing Investigation"

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002979.html

Reid: Cheney Obstructing Investigation
From Laura Rosen at War and Piece...

Reid on Fire

The New Republic has more on what I reported last month: that Cheney has intervened with chairman Pat Roberts to obstruct the Senate Select Intelligence committee's investigation of the Bush administration's use of Iraq intelligence. TNR write:

...--More dramatically, Reid also made it clear that he believes the delay in the Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation of prewar Iraq WMD--the underlying issue behind Tuesday's closed session--is entirely attributable to Vice President Dick Cheney. "Nothing happens regarding intelligence gathering ... unless it's signed off on by the Vice President," he said. " Roberts couldn't do it"--i.e., Roberts couldn't conduct a full investigation without Cheney's approval. When I asked Reid whether he meant to state so flatly that Cheney was personally and directly stalling the Intelligence Committee's work, he didn't pause a beat. In fact he almost stood from his chair. "Yes. I say that without any qualification ... Circle it." ...

I don't understand why we haven't heard Pat Roberts complaining more vociferously about the obstruction he's experienced from the Veep. Why would the Senator stand for the administration bucking oversight and Congressional reporting requirements on Iraq intelligence, torture, black site prisons, etc.? (Via Tapped's Ezra Klein).



http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051103/pl_afp/usital ...

But committee staff sources say that before the cooperation ceased, the committee had received from Feith’s office internal memos suggesting that the office may indeed have been conducting unlawful activities. In particular, Democratic staffers are interested in a secret December 2001 meeting of two Feith deputies, Larry Franklin and Harold Rhode, with Ghorbanifar in Rome. The meeting also included members of a foreign intelligence service (Italy’s SISMI). The catch is that it wasn’t reported in advance to the intelligence committee or the CIA, in possible violation of Section 502 of the National Security Act, which says that anyone conducting intelligence activities must inform the committee and the agency



"Italy MPs probe Niger-Iraq claim"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4402594.stm

Italy MPs probe Niger-Iraq claim

The director of the Italian military intelligence agency (Sismi) is due to give evidence over allegations that Iraq sought to buy uranium from Niger.

Nicolo Pollari is testifying before a parliamentary committee over reports that Italy wilfully gave the US and UK evidence that turned out to be false......


The Italian hearing into the claims is being held behind closed doors, but some details were expected to emerge later.

Italian newspaper La Repubblica says Italian agents gave the false dossier to British and American intelligence services........


"Niger Uranium Forgeries: Excavating a Roman Mystery"



One has to wonder how Laura can have such certain knowledge of what Fitzgerald has or has not requested. Ah, but if there is no such report -- and she cites the head of the Italian intelligence oversignt committee, one Enzo Bianco, denying it -- then how can Fitzgerald have requested it? There is, here, perhaps some confusion as to the nature of the "report" -- is it official, or is it just a transcript of a hearing? I think this guy, whoever he is, has the right idea.

Giovanni D'Avanzo, writing in La Repubblica , poses a few questions to Senor Bianco's oversight committee, and in the course of them avers:

"Sometime after October 9, 2002, a team of SISMI agents are ordered to keep Rocco Martino under close surveillance ... Why was no surveillance memo or report issued to judicial investigators on Rocco Martino, who is investigated by the Rome Public Prosecutor’s office in 2003, until the fall of 2004?"

So there was an investigation, albeit not by the Italian parliament but by Rome's public prosecutor. It could be that this is what both Walker's and my own sources are referring to.

Laura cites several other skeptics, including a reporter for La Repubblica and "a former U.S. official recently in Italy," who say this story is "the echo of a rumor put out by people back the States." She also cites Vince Cannistraro, "who at one time heard rumors of such a report from Italian sources," and who

"Now says there doesn't appear to be a parliamentary report either. 'There is no published report,”'Cannistraro told me Monday. 'If there is a report, we might expect it would have some analysis and conclusions. There is no report, at least not a published report. …I think this stuff is just getting circulated.'"

Of course it isn't published -- that's the whole point.

Yes, it's true, as Laura says, that the Italians aren't too eager to have the blame pinned on SISMI -- but that doesn't mean SISMI isn't involved. And some Italians -- the left-wing opposition coalition, for example -- might be understandably eager to expose the scandal in the run-up to Italy's elections scheduled for next year.

Laura goes into the Italian role in creating and disseminating these documents, referring to the La Repubblica series on the subject, but somehow neglects to mention the crucial American angle -- and the key role of American neocons, i.e. Michael Ledeen, in funneling the information contained in the Niger forgeries to Washington. Someone legitimized these fake documents by doing an end run around the CIA and the mainstream intelligence community, and injected a fabrication into the American intelligence stream. Who was it? La Repubblica fingers the Office of Special Plans, and names names, including Ledeen, Harold Rhode, and Larry Franklin, the confessed spy for Israel.

...

I trust my source, and I furthermore think it's unimportant whether this information is coming from the Italian parliament or Rome's public prosecutor: the point is that the information is there, and it's getting out. Antiwar.com stands by its story.


"Open the Ledeen Dossier!"



The stakes involved in the Ledeen dossier are much more significant than the particular incident around the yellowcake. As EIR documented at great length, Ledeen is not just a nasty American political operative, but had been brought into the service of one of the remnant fascist organizations of the Mussolini era, the Propaganda Two (P-2) freemasonic lodge. P-2, which was founded by avowed wartime fascist grandmaster Licio Gelli, is an outgrowth of the Venetian synarchist bankers network which runs international terrorism, and proceeds from the avowed aim of destroying all nation-states, particularly the United States. The P-2 network has been exposed over the past 20-plus years as the real center of international terrorism, including the left and right wings of the "strategy of tension" which carried out such atrocities as the 1980 Bologna bombing, and the assassination of former Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro.

Italian political life is riddled with assets, if not outright agents, of the P-2. Notable among them is Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi himself, whose membership card is a matter of public record. Given the prominence of P-2 influence in Italy, it should be no surprise that the Italians, under a Berlusconi government, were the ones who provided the cover of the forged Niger yellowcake documents, to support the Cheney-Bush war drive.

The question raised here is a fundamental one. The role of former P-2ers Ledeen and Berlusconi in promoting the war, underscores the reality that the drive for empire and world dictatorship, for which Cheney is a frontman, is in fact the project of an international synarchist oligarchy, the direct descendants of those banking families who funded Hitler and Mussolini, and created World War II. Cheney is undoubtedly a fascist thug, eager to carry out whatever wars, torture, and economic genocide are on the agenda of the desperate synarchist bankers. But the brains for these operations come from the top level of the heirs of the Venetian banking system, who know that they will destroy the United States as a republic by carrying out these plans.

The prime objective for all those patriots and world-citizens who wish to save this planet from a descent into a New Dark Age, is, of course, to remove Dick Cheney from office. But exposing the roots of Cheney policies in the global Venetian synarchist banking system, is a crucial concomitant, if we are to get the alternative, FDR-like policy put into effect.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/nolan-m2.html

How would the neocon think tanks view martial law? Michael Ledeen, a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, and close and trusted White House adviser, has this to say on p. 173 of his book Machiavelli on Modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli’s Iron Rules Are As Timely and Important Today As Five Centuries Ago: “Paradoxically, preserving liberty may require the rule of a single leader – a dictator – willing to use those dreaded 'extraordinary measures,' which few know how, or are willing, to employ."

According to the Boston Globe, Ledeen in a 2003 speech to the American Enterprise Institute, asserted our nation’s insatiable lust for war by claiming that "All the great scholars who have studied American character have come to the conclusion that we are a warlike people and that we love war. . .What we hate is not casualties but losing." Did anyone in the media ever challenge an administration spokesman to defend Ledeen’s staggeringly wrongheaded, anti-American values? Did any of the (self-described) scholars at AEI that day ask why the GD fool would say such a thing? President Bush, for his part has personally offered these congratulations to the AEI: “At the American Enterprise Institute, some of the finest minds in our nation are at work on some of the greatest challenges to our nation. You do such good work that my administration has borrowed 20 such minds.”

The leaders of the War Machine – with their gulags, their lies, their senseless, immoral war – do not treat enemies and purported enemies terribly well. In the event of martial law, it would be naïve indeed to suspect that they would treat Americans any better. Patriots – left, right and center – should unite under the American flag to stop the War Machine today while they still can. The impeachment of Bush and Cheney is the obvious place to start. We, the people, should demand it of the US Congress, just as statesmen and citizens of their time demanded the Bill of Rights. Congress should be ordered, as well, to act responsibly and responsively and in the best interest of the sovereign Republic of the United States of America, not in the interest of neocon warmongers.


"Italy's Top Spy Names Freelance Agent as Source of Forged Niger-Iraq"

... Uranium Documents


http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytim ...

Italy's Top Spy Names Freelance Agent as Source of Forged Niger-Iraq Uranium Documents

November 4, 2005 by ELAINE SCIOLINO and ELISABETTA POVOLEDO

ROME, Nov. 3 - Italy's spymaster identified an Italian occasional spy named Rocco Martino on Thursday as the disseminator of forged documents that described efforts by Iraq to buy uranium ore from Niger for a nuclear weapons program, three lawmakers said Thursday.

The spymaster, Gen. Nicolò Pollari, director of the Italian military intelligence agency known as Sismi, disclosed that Mr. Martino was the source of the forged documents in closed-door testimony to a parliamentary committee that oversees secret services, the lawmakers said.

Senator Massimo Brutti, a member of the committee, told reporters that General Pollari had identified Mr. Martino as a former intelligence informer who had been "kicked out of the agency." He did not say Mr. Martino was the forger.

The revelation came on a day when the Federal Bureau of Investigation confirmed that it had shut down its two-year investigation into the origin of the forged documents.


http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002983.html

Laura Rozen: "The (Niger forgeries) Report that Wasn't"

For weeks in the run-up to the Libby indictment last Friday, reports swirled in the blogosphere and some wires. They contended that CIA leak prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald had “widened his probe” to include investigating the origins of the Niger yellowcake forgeries themselves. They spoke of Fitzgerald getting ahold of a secret Italian parliamentary report that reportedly fingered a gang of American neoconservatives and aides to Ahmad Chalabi as being behind the Niger forgeries.

...

There’s just one problem: Not only has Fitzgerald not received such a report or even indicated he has any interest in one. There is no Italian parliamentary report, published or unpublished, on the Niger forgeries. In fact, until today, there has been no Italian parliamentary investigation of the Niger forgeries, or the claim promoted by the Italian military intelligence organization Sismi to the CIA and other western intelligence agencies that Iraq was seeking vast quantities of yellowcake uranium in Niger.

...

A reporter with the Italian newspaper Repubblica, which published a blockbuster series on the origins of the Niger forgeries last week, said that he heard rumors of such a report while in Washington this past summer, and went back to Italy and checked them out with his sources. He was left scratching his head. Not only is there no such report, there is as yet no such Italian parliamentary investigation. Sismi’s director Nicolo Pollari was interviewed by the Italian parliamentary committee overseeing the intelligence services on Thursday, in a closed-door session.

...

The Italian military intelligence organization Sismi reported that Iraq had signed a contract to purchase 500 tons of yellowcake uranium from Niger to the CIA in October 2001 and February 2002. It also reported those claims to Britain’s foreign intelligence service, the MI6, which reported them back to Washington. A motley crew including a senior Sismi officer, a former Sismi officer turned intelligence peddler (Rocco Martino), and a Sismi asset at the Niger embassy in Rome were identified by Repubblica as having collaborated to assemble the Niger forgeries, after staging a robbery on New Year’s Day 2001 to get official Niger embassy letterhead and a diplomatic codebook. Martino reportedly sold the dossier of forgeries to the French, the British, attempted but failed to sell them to the American embassy in Rome, and to an Italian reporter working for a Berlusconi owned magazine.


Lets hope Fitzgerald really does stay un-compromised, period because everyone knows from reading it Cheney deflected the blame to Italy.

The real forgers were NOT mentioned ie Duane Claridge so you can immediately see it.....total fucking whitewash in progress and its going to take a huge entity/army to get this bastard once and for all.

Notice how there was never any mention of....MICHAEL LEDEEN, mossad etc....

More about the Whitewash....you can spot them a damn mile away now.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051103/wl_mideast_af ...

"no one here has any recollection of Niger and uranium being discussed"


http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com /

QUESTION: Thank you. Any more explanation of the Berlusconi-President discussion about Italian intelligence on Iraq -- is this to say that Mr. Fitzgerald's finding that the Niger claim had its genesis in Italian intelligence was wrong?
SCOTT McCLELLAN: Mr. Fitzgerald's -- I'll have to look back at what his finding was. I don't recall the specifics of that.

QUESTION: Fitzgerald found that what we had been calling British intelligence, the document -- the forged document --

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Maybe I missed that. I don't think so. I don't think so.

QUESTION: -- alleging an Iraq --

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Okay, I don't think he did.

QUESTION: I'm wrong on this?

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Maybe I'm wrong. But I don't think he --

QUESTION: That's not ringing any bells.

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Yes.

QUESTION: It's not ringing any bells with other people either.

QUESTION: No, it is, it is. And I can't remember if it's Fitzgerald or somebody else, but there's this is the central issue is --

QUESTION: The central issue was --

QUESTION: -- the source of the --

QUESTION: The source of the forged document was Italy, who handed it to --

SCOTT McCLELLAN: No, the -- we actually briefed on the source of the information back in July of 2003, and the source was the National Intelligence Estimate and British Intelligence. That was the basis for the reference in the President's State of the Union address.

QUESTION: Fitzgerald found an Italian tie, and I presume this is what the discussion between the President and Berlusconi was about.

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Yes, they -- like I said they -- Prime Minister Berlusconi brought it up, and as they indicated, that there wasn't any documents that were provided to us on Niger and uranium by --

QUESTION: Wait, no documents or no intelligence?

SCOTT McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?

QUESTION: The press report out of Italy is a transcription -- it's a transcription of the forged documents, not the actual documents themselves. But Berlusconi said yesterday was, no information passed from Italy to the United States.

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Yes, I think he was accurately reflecting what he indicated in the meeting.

QUESTION: So that accurately characterizes the President's position, that the United States never received any intelligence --

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Well, Prime Minister Berlusconi was reflecting that within the meeting, and we've previously said in regards to a question that came up about a meeting here at the White House that no one here has any recollection of Niger and uranium being discussed at that meeting, much less any documents being provided.



http://neworleans.cox.net/cci/newsnational/nationa ...
Italian Lawmaker Says Country's Secret Service Warned U.S. That Iraq Uranium Documents Were Fake


"Hadley told a press briefing that he had briefly met the head of Italy's SISMI secret intelligence service, Nicolo Pollari, on September 9, 2002 in a "courtesy call" aimed at getting to know his new colleague.

"There was a meeting in Washington on that date. I did attend a meeting with him," Hadley said in response to a question about a report published last week in the Italian center-left newspaper La Repubblica, which disclosed the meeting.

"It was, so far as we can tell from our records, about less than 15 minutes. It was a courtesy call. Nobody participating in that meeting or asked about that meeting has any recollection of a discussion of natural uranium, or any recollection of any documents being passed. And that's also my recollection," he said."
AFP News
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051103/pl_afp/usital ...

Well Hadley, I'm sure there was a meeting....and I'm also sure you took the Niger forgeries to Frederick Fleitz.

I mean, you wouldn't LIE about everything would you? And attempt to get executive priveledge to save your ass? Nah, not you Hadley, who lied about going to Italy to begin with!

http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp11012005.html

November 1, 2005

Berlusconi's Halloween Visit
The Plame Affair Leads to Rome
By GARY LEUPP

"All roads lead to Rome," and it seems that Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into the Plame Affair, and more broadly the lies used to hoodwink the American people into supporting a criminal war on Iraq, will also trudge down the Appian Way lined this Halloween with the ghosts of crucified Iraqis.

The Italian newspaper La Repubblica has recently published an exposé alleging in essence that the Italian military intelligence agency SISMI (Servizio per le Informazioni e la Sicurezza Militare) at the specific behest of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi provided bogus intelligence to the Bush neocons in order to curry favor with the U.S. and to abet the relentless drive for war between 9-11 and the March 2003 invasion. This follows an Italian parliamentary report released in part to the public in July concerning the forged Niger uranium documents at the heart of the Plame Affair. These, which purport to show a deal between Baghdad and Niger for the purchase of huge quantities of yellowcake, were it seems produced in the Italian capital.

The report names four men as the likely forgers of the documents (Michael Ledeen, Dewey Clarridge, Ahmed Chalabi and Francis Brookes) and suggests that the forgeries may have been planned at December 2001 gathering in Rome involving Ledeen and SISMI chief Nicolò Pollari. Also in attendance at that meeting: Larry Franklin, Harold Rhode, Manucher Ghorbanifar, Antonio Martino and others including a former senior official of the Revolutionary Guard in Iran. Here is a true rogues' gallery.

Michael Ledeen: neocon columnist, National Review Online contributing editor, specialist on the thought of Machiavelli and on Italian fascism, former employee of the Pentagon, the State Department and the National Security Council, was involved in the transfer of arms to Iran during the Iran-Contra affair. Active in the American Enterprise Institute, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), and Center for Democracy in Iran (CDI). Advocates regime change by force in Iran and Syria.

Nicolò Pollari: Author of many publications on legal and economic matters, investigation techniques and intelligence. Tax law Professor at the Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria. SISMI head since October 2001.

Dewey Clarridge: former CIA operative, famous in mid-1980s for his role in the Iran-Contra Affair. Head of CIA's Latin America division 1981-84, directed the mining of Nicaragua's harbors and helped organize the Contras. Indicted in November 1991 on seven counts of perjury and false statements, pardoned by first president Bush Christmas Eve 1992.

Ahmad Chalabi: convicted swindler, leader of U.S.-funded Iraqi National Congress, neocon ally, presently one of two deputy prime ministers in Iraqi government.

Francis Brookes: member of the "Rendon Group," a "public relations" body formed by the Pentagon engaged to promote Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress.

Larry Franklin: colonel in USAF reserve, subordinate to Douglas Feith in Defense Department, Middle East specialist, under arrest for espionage for Israel.

Harold Rhode: Pentagon official, Middle East specialist, Ledeen protégé, American Enterprise Institute, heavy neocon.

Manucher Ghorbanifar: Iranian exile, arms dealer, one-time CIA operative distrusted by CIA since 1980s. Key figure in the Iran-Contra scandal.

Antonio Martino: Founding member of Forza Italiano (Berlusconi's political party), Professor of Economics, adjunct scholar with the Heritage Foundation, Italian Defense Minister.




"Previous versions of the report were redacted and had all the names removed, though it was possible to guess who was involved. This version names Michael Ledeen as the conduit for the report and indicates that former CIA officers Duane Clarridge and Alan Wolf were the principal forgers. All three had business interests with Chalabi."

Alan Wolf died about a year and a half ago of cancer. He served as chief of the CIA's Near East Division as well as the European Division, and was also CIA chief of station in Rome after Clarridge. According to my source, "he and Clarridge and Ledeen were all very close and also close to Chalabi." The former CIA officer says Wolf "was Clarridge's Agency godfather. Significantly, both Clarridge and Wolf also spent considerable time in the Africa division, so they both had the Africa and Rome connection and both were close to Ledeen, closing the loop."

A veteran of the Iran-Contra scandal, Ledeen played an important role in the Iran-Contra "arms for hostages" scandal by setting up meetings between the American government and the Iranian arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar. Not all that unexpected coming from a self-proclaimed advocate of Machiavelli's amoralism. Today, Ledeen is among the most visible and radical neoconservative ideologues whose passion for a campaign of serial "regime-change" in the Middle East is undiminished by the Iraqi debacle. Just as the Roman senator Cato the Elder finished his perorations with the command "Carthage must be destroyed," so Michael "Creative Destruction" Ledeen closes his hopped-up warmongering essays with "Faster, please!," an exhortation presumably addressed to his confreres in the Bush administration.

Ledeen has kept the neocon faith – and the same friends – for all these years. He's still buddies with Ghorbanifar. In December 2001, he had a meeting in Rome with Ghorbanifar in the company of the Pentagon's top Iran specialist, Larry Franklin, and Harold Rhode, assigned to the Office of Net Assessment, a Pentagon think tank. Also at the Rome conclave: a number of Ghorbanifar's Iranian friends, including a former senior official of the Revolutionary Guard. Rounding out the distinguished guest list, we have the Italian delegation, consisting of SISMI head honcho Nicolo Pollari, the head of Italy's military intelligence agency, and Italian Defense Minister Antonio Martino, a neocon favorite. Once again, Ledeen plays the middleman – but what kind of a deal was he trying to negotiate?

more
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e10571.htm


At the beginning of 2001, a few weeks before George Bush took office, there was a break-in at the Niger embassy in Rome. Strangely, nothing of value was taken. Months later came 9/11 and a month after that, as George Bush wondered how to get back at the terrorists, a report from the Italian security service (Sismi) reached the CIA: Iraq was seeking to buy uranium.

Disappointingly for the neocons, the CIA sent Ambassador Joseph Wilson to Niger to check the story: he reported that it was nonsense. When the story was repeated by Bush, Wilson went public. His wife, CIA agent Valerie Plame, was then outed by the White House. Hence Rove's predicament.

An organisation called the Office of Special Plans (OSP) was set up in the Pentagon by Douglas Feith, a former consultant to Israel's Likud party, to prepare for the war. In the words of Robert Baer, a distinguished former CIA man, it was a "competing intelligence shop at the Pentagon"..."if you didn't like the answer you're getting from the CIA". In short, bogus stories would get a second chance at the OSP.

A clue to the ancestry of these black arts can be found in 1980, when right-wing Republicans wanted Ronald Reagan elected. They publicised a story that Billy Carter, the then President Jimmy Carter's colourful brother, had received $50,000 (£28,000) from the Libyan government.

The story was always denied by the President and no evidence of the payment was found, but the story helped to elect Reagan. Its source? Sismi, and an associate of a man called Michael Ledeen.




First of all, I am not a leftist. Secondly, the sources for the quotes of former CIA and DIA agent Philip Giraldi were my interviews of him, as indicated in the correctly transcribed entry on the Wikipedia page, and which I provided the mp3 link for. Fourth, I am happy that the US is no longer part of the British Empire.

As far as Ledeen and the Niger uranium forgeries, Giraldi explained in the interviews that the "couple of CIA agents" were paid in foreign accounts and that Fitzgerald had "already found the money trail." Ledeen's connections to the Office of Special Plans and Sismi are well documented, he attended a number of meetings in Italy with Harold Rhode, who "practically lived out of (Iranian spy) Ahmad Chalabi's office," Manucher Ghorbanifar and guilty Israeli spy Larry Franklin, around the time the Italians began passing on the (already debunked) story back to the US.

As Josh Marshall put it in The Hill:

"he intelligence reports that came in to Washington in late 2001 were from Italian military intelligence, SISMI. The other detail, according to intelligence sources I’ve spoken to, is that those reports turned out to be text transcriptions of Niger forgeries that didn’t surface in Rome until almost a year later...

From the very beginning, American suspicions about a Niger-Iraq trade in uranium were based on what turned out to be the forged documents. And the text transcriptions of those documents came in from Italian intelligence...

Burba, the Italian journalist who eventually brought the forgeries to the U.S. Embassy in Rome, got them from an unnamed Italian “security consultant.” His name turns out to be Rocco Martino, a retired SISMI operative. And as I mentioned last week, last summer, my colleagues and I conducted a series of in-person interviews with him.

It has sometimes been suggested in the Italian press that Martino himself is the forger. But he told us a different story — one that was corroborated by another participant in the handling of the documents. Martino told us that the documents came from a still-serving SISMI colonel, whom he named."

But where did they originate? Giraldi's partner, Vincent Cannistraro, Director for Intelligence Programs at the National Security Council under Reagan, has maintained that they were produced in the US and has said, "You'd be very close," in answer to the question of whether Ledeen forged them.

Combined with what Giraldi had to say, it sure seems like enough to take to a grand jury to me.

Or is it not a crime to lie a country into war?




July Friday 29th 2005 (05h28) :
KARL ROVE, MICHAEL LEDEEN SPIES PROCURED FORGED NIGER DOCUMENTS


KARL ROVE and VARIOUS SPIES HE IS LINKED TO

Karl Rove’s only full-time foreign-policy advisor is Michael Ledeen, a rabid anti-Arab, pro-Israel activist. The FBI is investigating Ledeen for procuring forged documents (shown here) on nonexistent WMD, which George Bush used to justify his war on Iraq. When Joseph Wilson exposed the farce, Rove helped "out" Wilson’s CIA wife. Did Ledeen procure the documents for Rove, and how might he have done that? The story includes multinational stool pigeon Rocco Martino, Italian spy Francesco Pazienza, wanted CIA spy Robert Seldon Lady, and Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin, who’s under charges of giving US secrets to Israel.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Rove’s foreign-policy advisor, Michael Ledeen, proclaimed "the rightness of the fascist cause" in 1972. In 1984 he got George Bush Sr to appoint Iranian arms merchant and Iranian/Israeli double-agent Manucher Ghorbanifar as a middleman in the scandalous Iran-Contra affair. Ledeen has been a fixture in Washington and Israel ever since, advocating a modern version of the Crusades against Islamic nations. Based on what he has said and written, I believe Ledeen is insane.
Michael Ledeen, Rove’s "brain," is one of the leading advocates for a US attack on Iran. The Washington Post quoted Ledeen as saying that Rove told him, "Anytime you have a good idea, tell me." I guess that means we can look forward to the Bush team drumming up a war with Iran.

George Bush Jr., when he assumed the presidency in 2000, already knew that he was going to settle the family score with Saddam Hussein. His "brain," Rove, quickly enlisted Ledeen to trump up a causus belli.

EARLY 2000: ROCCO MARTINO AND THE FRENCH CONNECTION

...


The war is not just about oil, Israel’s fears/ambitions, or US hegemony. There are contracts and contractors in Iraq. Modern-day carpetbaggers with briefcases descended like a plague of scorpions on the poor, bloodied, bombed-out, grieving people of Iraq. They included the daughter of the war’s chief banshee -- Simone Ledeen, Michael’s young daughter -- shown in the photo, greeting with an impish smile another occupier at the Baghdad airport -- getting ready to lord it over the Iraqis as she tries out her new MBA in working for the CPA. Caption: "The creatures step out of the tripods." Maybe it’ll help to pay off those student loans -- huh, Michael?


http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/10/19/14555 ...

Keyser Soze aka Michael Ledeen.

Michael Ledeen was one of the founders of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). He holds the Freedom Chair at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a think tank for AIPAC. He is co-founder of the Coalition for Democracy in Iran. As far back as 1980, the CIA allegedly listed Ledeen as an agent of influence of Israel. Ledeen is the main foreign policy advisor to Karl Rove. Ledeens main obsession seems to be to overthrow Iran.

In 1972 he published the book Universal Fascism, in which he expounds upon "the rightness of the fascist cause." In Universal Fascism, Ledeen first builds his case that fascism was the "20th Century Revolution" and that "people yearn for the real thing - revolution". It's the blueprint for a fascist revolution.

In 1980 he collaborated with Francesco Pazienza of SISMI and P-2 in the "BillyGate" affair. This is the same Pazienze who was recently found out to belong to the parallel intelligence agency in Italy. In 1985 Pazienza was found guilty of political manipulation, forgery, and the protection of terrorists. Ledeen is identified in court documents as an agent of SISMI.

The Pentagon downgraded Ledeen's security clearances from Top Secret-SCI to Secret in the mid-1980s, after the FBI began a probe of Ledeen for passing classified materials to a foreign
country, believed to be Israel.

http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism ... edeen.html


"Everything You Need to Know About Michael Ledeen"


April 7, 2005

Everything You Need to Know About Michael Ledeen
By Katherine Yurica

Would you be surprised to find that a man who was deeply involved in the Iran-Contra scandal during the Reagan Administration, a man who is the darling of the Bush White House and is an adviser to Karl Rove, a man who loves Machiavelli and studies him, a neo-conservative who has close ties to one of America’s leading “Christian” Dominionists—Pat Robertson, and a man who called Pearl Harbor “lucky” and a providentially inspired event—may be the man who is behind the forging of the Niger documents that convinced America to launch a preemptive strike against Iraq?

<snip>

It would be foolish for America’s political strategists and congressional leaders to ignore Michael Ledeen and his interpretation of Machiavelli. Mr. Ledeen speaks from the cutting edge of a group of men and women who desire nothing more than to reconstruct America in their own image. This nation is in grave danger. Ledeen belongs to a group of men, including Harry Jaffa, Pat Robertson, Willmoore Kendall to Allan Bloom, who, according to Shadia Drury, scholar and author of Leo Strauss and the American Right, share “the view that America is too liberal and pluralistic and that what it needs is a single orthodoxy that governs the public and private lives of its citizens.”<1>

The belief in a single voice that governs the public should cause all Americans to understand these men want to convert this nation to a permanent dictatorship. Their inspirer was Leo Strauss, a professor who taught Machiavellian methods to many of them at the University of Chicago. In fact, Paul Wolfovitz earned his doctorate under Strauss and many of the neo-cons in the White House studied under him. Strauss believed every society needs a “single public orthodoxy.” As Drury put it, “a set of ideas that defines what is true and false, right and wrong, noble and base.” Strauss believed that the role of religion was indispensable to the political success of a nation. For a political society had to hold together and act as a unit in lock step with the leader. Strauss believed that religion was the means to inculcate the desired ideas into the minds of the masses. He didn’t care what religion—just as long as it was a religion that could link itself to the political order.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23849&p=596348&hilit=niger+forgeries#p596348
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Feb 14, 2017 7:11 pm

back on topic



the Justice Department informed the White House a month ago that Mr. Flynn had not been truthful about his conversations with the ambassador.


explanation for the Yellowcake impaired

you see Flynn is best buds with Ledeen ...wrote a book with him so this is all so very relevant

Ledeen...one of the main guys that help start the Iraq War with forged documents ...kinda important


new stuff

Mike Pence says on Feb 9 found out by media reports about Flynn

Mike Flynn changed his story on Feb. 9

new guy that is going to take over was talked to last week :)
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby Karmamatterz » Tue Feb 14, 2017 7:18 pm

unbelievable that you are not fully aware of the Forged Niger Docs..the made up shit that got us into the Iraq War

The name Valerie Plame mean anything to you? Joe Wilson?

no wonder you had to go back and dig up an old Kennedy story


You know what they say about assumptions, right?

What you wrote is a lame joke. I'm not even laughing anymore its so LAME.

Give it a rest and go back to your pasta party.
Karmamatterz
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Feb 14, 2017 7:21 pm

I don't make any assumptions ....I was going by exactly what you said..


gotta got for the baby shit ...no doubt..calling names when your mad irritable or whatever

at least it is a kinder gentler name calling this time
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Tue Feb 14, 2017 7:58 pm

Trump Flailing: The Story Behind the Story of Mike Flynn's Fall
National security investigations continue as Bannon consolidates power in an embattled White House.
By Jefferson Morley / AlterNet
February 14, 2017

President Trump’s chief National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has resigned after his pre-inauguration discussions with a Russian diplomat came to the attention of the National Security Agency and federal investigators. When details of the discussions leaked to the Washington Post on Monday, Flynn was gone within hours.

"Upheaval is now standard operating procedure inside the White House," the Post observed.

“The chaos and competing factions that were a Trump trademark in business and campaigning now are starting to define his presidency,” said the Post. Breitbart News agrees that the flood of leaks "will itself become an enduring narrative about the Trump White House if it doesn't bring the leaks under control."

The increasingly dysfunctional Trump administration is a cockpit of clashing factions, large and small, presided over by a chief executive who believes his own lies, lacks interest in the daily demands of the job, and is incapable of planning ahead. For national security policymakers, such as Colin Kahl, former adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, the increasing power of senior White House adviser Steve Bannon is "dangerous."

The Story Behind the Story

In his resignation letter, Flynn said he had given “incomplete information” to Vice President Mike Pence about the discussions. Pence had told a TV interviewer that Flynn had not discussed sanctions with the Russians. The leakers of the story emphasized that Flynn had “made himself vulnerable to blackmail” by the Russians.

That is hardly the whole story, but it is accurate enough for the quiet men and women who lead the two ongoing investigations of the Trump administration. One of them is Sally Yates, the acting attorney general fired by President Trump for objecting to his travel ban. According to the Post, it was Yates who had warned the Trump White House that Flynn’s talks might be a violation of the law.

The two investigations are separate but related.

According to credible news reports, the FBI has been investigating Russian psychological and propaganda operations targeting both the Democratic and Republican parties during the 2016 campaign. The NSA investigation apparently focused on Flynn.

In any case, the headlines and the presidential entourage are being driven by what these investigations uncover.

NSA Bugged Flynn's Call

The proximate cause of Flynn’s defenestration was carelessness, according to news reports. The former general, known for his hostility to Islam, was careless in speaking on a tapped telephone line to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on December 30.

The Obama administration had just announced sanctions on Russia in response to Russian psychological warfare operations targeting U.S. election operatives in both parties. The Russians were expected to retaliate. To the surprise of U.S. officials, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced December 30 that there would be no response, winning the Russian leader a laudatory tweet from Donald Trump.

Intelligence analysts began to search for clues that could help explain Putin's move. The search turned up Kislyak's communications, which the FBI routinely monitors. Thanks to NSA surveillance, Obama administration officials could listen to Flynn’s chat with Putin’s man.

Someone leaked the story of Flynn's call to David Ignatius of the Washington Post. Pence had to deny on TV.

The "blackmail" narrative of the Post and other major news organizations probably reflects a bureaucratic consensus of the FBI and other federal investigators that Flynn should have known the call was tapped and that he was making U.S. policy with a foreign official before Trump had even taken the oath of office.

As for Breitbart's hope of a more disciplined White House, there’s little chance of that. Trump and his team are not disciplined or experienced enough to run a leak-proof White House in the manner of Barack Obama and George W. Bush.

Clash of Factions

In the larger political context, what we are seeing is the clash of Washington factions. Trump is an incipient tyrant, as Yale historian Tim Snyder has pointed out. But Washington's factions will not surrender their powers without a struggle. The factions are based in the Executive Branch agencies and are led by senior officials and the bureaucratic cadres that support them.

These factions all have identifiable political agendas and varying degrees of sympathy with Trump. The Justice Department, FBI, CIA and National Security Agency also have their own institutional agendas that are independent of Trump. The leak of closely held information to embarrass or destroy rivals is a time-tested weapon in the Washington struggle for power.

In the White House, a much smaller but still powerful faction around Steve Bannon is consolidating power and persisting with the Trump campaign promises: barring refugees from Muslim countries, stepping up deportations of undocumented residents and dismantling the NATO alliance.

The Bannonization of national security policy continues, while the president tweets about "Saturday Night Live" and defends the Trump family brand.

Why Flynn Was Forced Out

Flynn’s conversations with the Russian ambassador were perhaps defensible. Mike McFaul, Obama’s former ambassador to Moscow, said he had pre-inauguration contacts with Russian officials, adding that he didn’t make any deals. Making independent deals with foreign officials is barred by a law called the Logan Act, though no one has ever been prosecuted for violating it.

The national security factions felt free to monitor Flynn’s phone calls because he was not competent to do the job of the national security adviser. The most successful National Security Advisers forge a consensus for the president from the disparate positions of the secretaries of State, Defense and Homeland Security. Flynn was more interested in striking poses, such as putting Iran “on notice," an amateurish and empty stunt that succeeded only in persuading the Iranian leaders that the American president is an "inexperienced" and dangerous buffoon who is in over his head.

Meanwhile, the business of putting together high-quality intelligence so that the president can make informed decisions—about China’s military, the war in Yemen, relations with Mexico—is grinding to a halt. Briefing papers that ran 3-6 pages for President Obama have been scaled back to one page—and must include maps, according to one new report.

Bannonization

The winner, for now, is White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, who was depicted by "Saturday Night Live" as the Grim Reaper manipulating a childish president.

Bannon's next victim is likely to be White House chief-of-staff Reince Priebus. Last week, Bannon said of Priebus, “There’s no daylight between us.” In Washington, those are usually the last words a political innocent hears before a long knife is inserted into his or her back.

Priebus served as Trump’s tenuous link to the Republican power brokers who hoped, in vain, that he might establish a semblance of a normal White House for a disinterested president, like James Baker did for Ronald Reagan. Fat chance. Trump thinks Priebus is a loser and he is expected to be the next to go in what inside-the-Beltway types like to call a “shakeup.”

This shakeup is more like a shakeout, with Bannon and his unprepared but monomaniacal aides, Stephen Miller and Sebastian Gorka, more in control of U.S. foreign policy than ever. The much-lampooned press secretary Sean Spicer is also reportedly on the way out, apparently because Melissa McCarthy’s impersonation of him is too accurate to please the president.

Whether Republicans on Capitol Hill develop a spine and investigate Flynn’s contacts is, as always, an open question.

In an interview with Politico’s Susan Glasser, Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, described Trump as a "wrecking ball president." But Corker made clear that he will not step in front of that wrecking ball.

As Trump flails, the leaks from the two federal investigations will continue. Flynn is the first victim of the national security factions out to defend their prerogatives from Trump's destructive ways. He will not be the last.
"Huey Long once said, “Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.” I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security."
-Jim Garrison 1967
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 1817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: California
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Feb 14, 2017 8:14 pm

Sebastian Gorka


the Nazi

Why Is Trump Adviser Wearing Medal of Nazi Collaborators?

Image
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Feb 14, 2017 8:57 pm

Dem: Trump should release transcripts of Flynn's Russia calls
http://thehill.com/policy/national-secu ... lynn-calls



and they will be coming out soon ..from what I hear
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:45 am

Flynn had to resign after misleading country. But questions remain: Did President or others know or approve his contacts with Russia?

Image
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:19 am

Flynn’s swift downfall: From a phone call in the Dominican Republic to a forced resignation at the White House

Here's why Trump’s national security adviser Michael Flynn resigned after just 24 days

President Trump's national security adviser Michael Flynn resigned Feb. 13 after revelations that he had discussed sanctions on Russia with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. prior to Trump taking office. Here's what you need to know. (Deirdra O'Regan/The Washington Post)

By Greg Miller, Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima February 14 at 8:40 PM
Michael Flynn was at a beachside resort in the Dominican Republic, a stretch of sand and sun that he and his wife had visited for years, when he took a few moments out of their post-election vacation for a call with the Russian ambassador to the United States.

As a veteran intelligence officer, Flynn must have known that a call with a Russian official in Washington would be intercepted by the U.S. government, pored over by FBI analysts and possibly even shared with the White House.

But six weeks later, Flynn was forced out of his job as national security adviser to President Trump over what was said in that conversation and Flynn’s inability to be truthful about it with then-Vice President-elect Mike Pence and other officials now in senior positions at the White House.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Tuesday that “the level of trust between the president and General Flynn had eroded to the point where he felt he had to make a change.”

But Flynn’s removal was also the culmination of swirling forces and resentment unleashed by the 2016 election. He embodied the bitterly partisan nature of the contest, leading “Lock her up” chants directed at Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton during the Republican National Convention. His unusual association with Russia — and the discovery of his secret communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak — fanned suspicion among senior Obama administration officials of a more sinister aspect to Russia’s interference in the election. And ultimately, Flynn’s misleading statements about the Kislyak calls added to broader concerns about the Trump administration’s regard for the truth.

What led to Michael Flynn's undoing? Embed Share Play Video2:15
The resignation of national security adviser Michael Flynn comes on the heels of reports that he discussed U.S. sanctions with the Russian ambassador while a civilian, before President Trump took office. (Jason Aldag/The Washington Post)
The sequence connecting Flynn’s call and his dismissal came to involve two presidents warily passing power, the leaders of national security agencies including the FBI and CIA, and incoming and outgoing transition officials who regarded one another with significant distrust.

Senior Obama administration officials said they felt so uncertain about the nature of the Flynn-Kislyak relationship that they took it upon themselves to scale back what they told Flynn and others on his incoming national security team, particularly on sensitive matters related to Russia. Officials emphasized, however, that there was no formal decision to limit information sharing with the Trump transition team.

“We did decide to not share with them certain things about Russia,” a former senior Obama administration official said. “We just thought, who knew? Would that information be safe?”

A flurry of communications
Flynn’s rising profile in the Trump campaign appears to have coincided with a resumption of his contacts with Kislyak. The two first met in 2013, when Flynn, then the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, met with military intelligence officials in Moscow on a trip that the Russian diplomat helped to arrange and coordinate.

As Moscow’s lead envoy in Washington, Kislyak’s communications were routinely monitored by the FBI, including diplomatic reports he filed with Moscow in which he documented his interactions with Flynn, according to current and former U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

At the same time, Russian intelligence services were carrying out an assault on the election, delivering troves of emails stolen from Democratic Party servers to the WikiLeaks Web site, according to U.S. officials. U.S. intelligence agencies later concluded that the effort was designed to destabilize U.S. democracy, damage Clinton’s prospects and help elect Trump.

No evidence has surfaced to suggest that Flynn’s contacts with Kislyak were in any way tied to the Russian operation. Nevertheless, by mid-December, senior officials in the Obama White House began to hear about Flynn’s contacts with Kislyak, both from intelligence reports and other sources.

Obama administration officials weren’t sure what to make of the communications. To some, they appeared to be consistent with the kind of diplomatic outreach expected of any incoming administration. To others, already alarmed by the scale of the Russian interference in the U.S. election, the frequency of the contacts seemed excessive and the lack of any effort by Flynn to coordinate his calls with the State Department was regarded with growing suspicion.

Susan E. Rice, President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, did not give Flynn advance notice of the sanctions that the White House planned to impose on Russia over its meddling in the election. Instead, Denis McDonough, who at the time was Obama’s chief of staff, waited until the sanctions were announced to inform his Trump counterpart, a former administration official said.


The measures that Obama announced on Dec. 29 included the expulsion of 35 suspected Russian intelligence officers from the United States, and the forced closure of Russian-owned compound in Maryland and New York used as resortlike retreats for that country’s spies and diplomats.

Flynn had a flurry of communications with Kislyak in the days leading up to that announcement, including, by his account, an exchange of holiday greetings via text message on Dec. 25. The two also traded phone calls that Flynn said were limited to condolences over the assassination of Russia’s ambassador to Turkey and the downing of a Russian aircraft, as well as a preliminary conversation about setting up a phone call between Russian President Vladi­mir Putin and Trump.

By that time, Flynn and his wife were in the Dominican Republic for a beachside respite before he moved into one of the most demanding jobs in the White House. It was there, at a resort on the eastern tip of the country, that Flynn fielded a Kislyak call as sanctions were announced.

“He got a hold of me,” Flynn said in the Post interview, “I was on vacation, actually, with my wife.”

The digital packets streaming between their phones were intercepted by the FBI, using capabilities provided by the National Security Agency, as part of its routine surveillance of Kislyak. An FBI agent prepared a brief intelligence report summing up the contents of the conversation, officials said.

The report was not widely circulated and might have attracted only scant attention were it not for a Putin move that baffled Washington. Rather than retaliate against the United States with comparable sanctions — standard practice during the Cold War, and afterward — Putin seemed to greet Obama’s punitive measures with an indifferent shrug.

Putin’s reaction — praised by Trump in a tweet saying “I always knew he was very smart” — sent officials at the White House, State Department and U.S. intelligence agencies scrambling for clues. What they began to focus on, in early January, were Flynn’s calls with Kislyak.


Telling the Trump team
On Jan. 5, FBI Director James B. Comey, CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. briefed Obama and a small group of his top White House advisers on the contents of a classified intelligence report showing that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Trump. That’s when White House officials learned that the FBI was investigating the Flynn-Kislyak calls. “The Flynn-Kislyak relationship was highlighted,” a former senior U.S. official said, adding that the bureau made clear “that there was an actual investigation” underway.

The Obama administration at times seemed almost paralyzed about how to respond to Russia’s unprecedented attack on the U.S. election system, even as officials watched it unfold. It wasn’t until weeks after the election that the Obama administration sought to punish Russia.

The Obama team was similarly slow in its deliberations over whether and how to confront the fledgling Trump administration over what it had uncovered in Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak.

The issue was forced out into the open on Jan. 12 in an op-ed by Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. The piece revealed Flynn’s calls with Kislyak and called for an explanation from the White House on whether the two men had discussed sanctions.

Pence and other members of the Trump transition team, still a week away from assuming power, checked with Flynn before they publicly denied that sanctions had been discussed during the call with Kislyak.

Sally Q. Yates, then the deputy attorney general, Clapper and Brennan wanted to inform the Trump White House that Flynn had misled Pence and other officials. They were concerned that Moscow could use the lie to blackmail Flynn and didn’t feel comfortable leaving Pence in the dark about being misled.

On Obama’s last full day in office, Jan. 19, Clapper and Brennan made the case to Comey for informing the Trump team about Flynn. The FBI director pushed back primarily on the grounds that notifying the new administration could complicate the agency’s investigation. The bureau, Comey also insisted, shouldn’t be “the truth police,” according to an official familiar with his thinking at the time. “In other words, if there’s not a violation of law here, it’s not our job to go and tell the vice president that he’s been lied to.”


In the days following Trump’s inauguration, FBI agents interviewed Flynn about his calls with Kislyak. That removed the basis for Comey’s earlier objection to notifying the White House, current and former officials said. It is unclear whether Flynn gave the agents an accurate account of his calls with Kislyak. If not, officials said he could find himself in serious legal jeopardy. The FBI interview with Flynn was first reported by the New York Times.

On Jan. 26, Yates notified White House counsel Donald McGahn about the concerns that she and the former intelligence chiefs had about Flynn’s misrepresentations to Pence and others. McGahn, in turn, informed Trump, leading to a review of whether Flynn had violated any laws. White House lawyers quickly concluded that no laws had been broken, according to Spicer.

In his letter of resignation, ­Flynn said that he had “inadvertently briefed the Vice President Elect and others with incomplete information regarding my phone calls with the Russian ambassador,” and that he had merely sought “to facilitate a smooth transition and begin to build the necessary relationships” for Trump with foreign leaders.

Current and former U.S. officials described that assertion as implausible, noting that sanctions were such a prominent subject of Flynn’s conversation with Kislyak that it seems unlikely he could have forgotten.

Spicer also suggested that ­Flynn’s false account of the sanctions discussion was part of a troubling pattern, saying that a “series of issues and series of statements and pronouncements” had damaged Flynn’s standing beyond repair.

Flynn’s version of events finally started to crumble on Feb. 7, when he was informed that The Post was preparing to publish an article about his discussion of sanctions with Kislyak, citing nine current and former U.S. officials. Flynn, at first, stood by his denials. Then, one day later, he acknowledged through a spokesman that he might have discussed sanctions but couldn’t recall.

Pence finally learned from The Post — two weeks after McGahn — that Flynn had misled him. It would appear that neither McGahn nor Trump had informed him of the false statements.

After Flynn apologized to Pence, the vice president seemed open to allowing Flynn to remain in place, according to a senior administration official. But Reince Priebus, Trump’s chief of staff who had also come to Flynn’s defense in January, “didn’t want to let it go,” the official added.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 620c7cb66f
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:34 am

Neo-Nazis Blame "The Jews" For Michael Flynn's Resignation

Pro-Trump Anti-Semites Call Flynn “One Of Our Best Guys” Who Has Been "Quite Critical Of The Jews"​

Blog ››› February 14, 2017 12:17 PM EST ››› ERIC HANANOKI
Image
Neo-Nazi writers are upset that retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn has resigned from his position as national security adviser. The anti-Semites are lionizing Flynn as “one of our best guys” and a “true patriot” who has “been quite critical of the Jews in the past.” They are also lamenting that his resignation is “definitely a loss … to the Jews” and are speculating that he was pushed out by “more subversive elements in the White House.”

As CNN noted, Flynn resigned on the night of February 13 “after reports surfaced that the Justice Department warned the Trump administration last month that Flynn misled administration officials regarding his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States and was potentially vulnerable to blackmail by the Russians.”

The disgraced former national security adviser has repeatedly pushed toxic views. Last July, Flynn shared a tweet that read in part, "Not anymore, Jews. Not Anymore." (He later apologized.) He claimed on Twitter that “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL.” Flynn also endorsed the work of racist author Mike Cernovich, who has frequently pushed white nationalist themes on his Twitter account (many of which he later deleted). Cernovich has claimed that “diversity is code for white genocide,” “Blacks use guns for murder. Whites use guns to kill themselves,” and “Diversity is bad for national security.”

Members of the white nationalist movement unsurprisingly applauded Flynn’s appointment to national security adviser. They are now mourning the loss of “one of our best guys.”

Daily Stormer: Flynn “Is One Of Our Best Guys. … This Is Definitely A Loss.”

The Daily Stormer is a neo-Nazi website that worships Adolf Hitler, posts defenses of the Holocaust, and attacks Jewish people as “kikes.” Editor Andrew Anglin wrote that Flynn’s resignation “is dumb. Team Trump shouldn’t give these people an inch. Flynn is one of our best guys. And he did nothing wrong.” He added:

This is giving a victory to the kike media.

I actually didn’t think the block on the travel ban was a loss. I think that was all part of the plan to get the public stirred up against activist judges, to get ready for the Supreme Court to rule on an even more hardcore version of the Moslem ban.

But this.

This is definitely a loss.

To the Jews.


He posted another piece stating that Flynn was under “vile Jew attacks” and commenting that accepting Flynn’s resignation “sends the wrong message to Russia, and more importantly, it sends the wrong message to the people -- that we are going to respond to bullying. I trust Trump, however, and I do have faith that there must have been very good reason for this decision.”

Infostormer: Flynn Is “A True Patriot” Who Has “Been Quite Critical Of The Jews In The Past.”

Infostormer is a neo-Nazi website that praises Hitler and states that it is “destroying Jewish tyranny.” Writer “Marcus Cicero” responded to Flynn’s resignation by calling him “a true patriot who loves his country, has over thirty years of service to back the first point up, and has offered nothing but loyalty to Trump since day one. He has also been quite critical of the Jews in the past.” The writer concluded:

My personal guess is that this attack on Flynn was pushed internally by more subversive elements in the White House that may or may not include Jared Kushner and Rence (sic) Priebus, who have seemingly attempted to railroad President Trump at times on his more hardcore measures.

But this is just total speculation at the moment, and I don’t want to get too hasty in making assumptions.

All I know is that the Jews are loving this whole spectacle, and are acting like sharks in blood-tinged water.

Be careful, Mr. President.


Be very careful.

Cicero posted another piece headlined “Russia Rises To General Flynn’s Defense, Brush Off Sneaky Jewish Attacks.” It concluded:

We’re going to be keeping a much closer eye on the White House factional struggles in the coming days and weeks, because if my senses are correct, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will likely be the next man attacked for his ties to Russia and Vladimir Putin.

The lead-up to the demise of General Flynn was somewhat ignored by us due to the sheer level of nonsense that has been pushed forth by the Lugenpresse lately, but we won’t make that mistake again.

The Jews are not going to get away with another bullying attack on our regime – they will be called out, and they will be defeated if and when they try again.


Richard Spencer: Flynn “Did Nothing Wrong” And Is A Victim Of “The Deep State.”

Richard Spencer is a neo-Nazi who, as the Southern Poverty Law Center notes, “advocates for an Aryan homeland for the supposedly dispossessed white race and calls for ‘peaceful ethnic cleansing’ to halt the ‘deconstruction’ of European culture.” He wrote on his AltRight.com website that Flynn “did nothing illegal; in my estimation, he did nothing wrong.” He concluded that “this scandal reveals that Trump lacks the allegiance, not just of the mass media, but of the Deep State, that is, the unelected bureaucratic and legal apparatus of the government. People within the Deep State leaked the information on Flynn’s phone call, and they will attempt to undermine Trump at every turn.”

UPDATE: White supremacist radio host and former KKK head David Duke is also blaming Jewish people for Flynn’s downfall. He tweeted: “Trump can’t let these Jews lynch General Flynn,” which linked to an unbylined piece on his website claiming that a Jewish conspiracy brought down Trump's former national security adviser. He also tweeted: “(((They))) weren't going to stop - Jewish Supremacy is out in the open like never before...”
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2017/02/14 ... ion/215338
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Feb 15, 2017 12:31 pm

Michael Flynn's White House Tenure: It's Funny 'Cause It's Treason


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwHzThU4X_4

Adam Schiff: It’s ‘Unlikely’ That Flynn Acted Alone

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee has some unanswered questions.

URI FRIEDMAN FEB 14, 2017 GLOBAL
Like ​The Atlantic? Subscribe to ​The Atlantic Daily​, our free weekday email newsletter.
Updated on Wednesday, February 15

The resignation of Michael Flynn has elicited two starkly different responses from the leaders of the U.S. Congress. “It just seems like there’s a lot of nothing there,” Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said in regard to the national-security adviser’s shifting accounts of whether he discussed U.S. sanctions with the Russian ambassador to the United States in December. The real problem, Nunes asserted, echoing Donald Trump, is the leaks of information about Flynn by U.S. intelligence officials to the press.

Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the same intelligence committee, argues just the opposite: Something very big may be going on here, and the American people need to know more, not less, about it. It “seems implausible and unlikely” that Flynn “was acting as a free agent” when he contacted Russia’s envoy about Barack Obama’s retaliation against the Russian government for interfering in the U.S. election, Schiff told me. “I ... want to know if Flynn’s conversation with the Russian ambassador about sanctions was something that [President Trump] asked him to do.”




“It’s the Russian goal to take down Western liberal democracy,” Schiff added. “In that hugely consequential struggle, if we’re being undermined by our own administration … that ought to matter to every American.”

Congress must also determine “whether any of the president’s team collaborated or colluded at all with Russia during the campaign,” Schiff said late Tuesday, shortly before The New York Times reported that members of Trump’s campaign had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence officials during the election.

That report raised but did not answer many of the same questions Schiff has articulated. The Times noted that intelligence agencies are still investigating “whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election,” and that “officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.”

I asked Schiff what his unanswered questions are, how he hopes to broaden congressional investigations into the Kremlin’s contacts with the Trump campaign, and why the probes are necessary in the first place. Below is an edited and condensed transcript of our conversation.

Uri Friedman: You’ve called for additional [congressional] investigations. What are the questions, at this juncture, you feel are still unanswered that we need answered?

RELATED STORY

Michael Flynn and Vladimir Putin at a Russia Today anniversary dinner in 2015
Trump's Russia Reset Will Survive Flynn's Ouster

Adam Schiff: There are two broad categories of questions. The first is: What kind of contacts did Flynn and/or other members of the Trump campaign have with the Russians during the course of Russia’s interference in our election? That’s very much within the scope of our investigation in the House Intelligence Committee. Those allegations, I think, are the most serious.


The next set of allegations concern Flynn’s contacts with the Russian ambassador in December, where they discussed the sanctions that had just been levied by the Obama administration for the Russians’ interference on Trump’s behalf in the campaign. And there we need to know exactly what they discussed, whether there were multiple conversations, whether there were also text communications as [White House Press Secretary] Sean Spicer has said, and whether those discussions were authorized by the president or others in the White House. And [we need to know] when administration officials became witting of the lie that Mike Flynn told [about not discussing sanctions with the Russian ambassador] and that the vice president then propagated to the American people.

Friedman: David Ignatius [of The Washington Post] quoted you in an article as saying that you also wanted to know whether any of these communications were encrypted. Is that still a concern of yours?

Schiff: I’d like to know any medium that General Flynn used to communicate with the Russians. We know there were voice communications. We know there were text communications. And I’d be interested to know just how those communications took place. That’s something [I am] requesting of the FBI as a member of the Gang of Eight [group of congressional leaders on intelligence matters] and I would hope that we would have the opportunity to review any transcripts of those conversations or communications.


Friedman: To what extent have you, as a member of the Gang of Eight, been briefed on the content of these conversations?

Schiff: We have not been briefed yet. I was just in the process yesterday of requesting any tapes or transcripts be provided to the Gang of Eight.

Friedman: The House Intelligence Committee has an ongoing investigation [into any connections between Russia and the Trump campaign]. What more do you want to see that would satisfy you?

“If Speaker Ryan isn’t willing to do the investigation that’s necessary here, he should get out of the way.”
Schiff: First of all I want to make sure that the scope of our investigation is broad enough to include the events that led up to Flynn’s resignation. Plainly we have the charter to look at any of those contacts during the campaign, but it would be a natural extension to look at Flynn’s contacts after the campaign that resulted in his removal. [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell said today that he thinks that ought to be the subject of the Senate Intelligence investigation. I’d like to see us get the same commitment from [House Speaker Paul Ryan]. And I was concerned when the speaker refused to make that commitment today. If the speaker isn’t willing to do the investigation that’s necessary here, he should allow us to form an independent commission and he ought to get out of the way.

Friedman: What can you do as the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee to pressure the Republicans to take on that extra investigation? [The GOP lawmakers] Devin Nunes and Jason Chaffetz indicated today that there’s not a lot of interest on the Republican side in a stepped-up investigation.


Schiff: I think that [position is] going to be very difficult for the speaker to maintain, and ultimately it’s the speaker’s decision what he will allow his committees to investigate. If Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans think that this is an appropriate source of investigation, how does the speaker explain why he won’t let the House look into it?

Friedman: What questions do you have specifically regarding the president himself?

Schiff: The first is whether any of the president’s team collaborated or colluded at all with Russia during the campaign—during Russian illegal activities in the United States. That, I think, is a very serious allegation that needs to be investigated. But I also want to know if Flynn’s conversation with the Russian ambassador about sanctions was something that the president asked him to do—was something the president was aware of, and was being done at the direction of the president, or any of the president’s staff, [Chief Strategist Steve] Bannon or anyone. Or whether the national-security adviser was acting as a free agent, which seems implausible and unlikely.

Friedman: Sean Spicer in his press conference today said [the White House] determined that [Flynn] did not do anything illegal. This was an issue of [lost] trust. And there’s been a lot of talk among legal experts about how this is not a violation of the Logan Act, which has been defunct for 200 years. So even if there was [direction] from some members of the administration [for Flynn to] bring up sanctions [with the Russian ambassador], why is that such a problem?


Schiff: You have to remember the context of this. The Russians had just interfered in the American elections in a way to help elect Donald Trump. The president of the United States, Barack Obama, then sanctions Russia for that interference. And then Trump’s team, through Flynn, reaches out to the Russian ambassador and potentially says, “Don’t worry about those sanctions. We’re going to take care of business. We’re not going to bite the hand that fed us.” That’s something that needs to be investigated. That’s hugely consequential.

And the broader context is: We’re in a competition with Russia right now. They are championing autocracy all over the world. We are promoting democracy. It is not communism vs. capitalism anymore, but it is authoritarianism vs. representative government. And it’s the Russian goal to take down Western liberal democracy. In that hugely consequential struggle, if we’re being undermined by our own administration—by General Flynn having secret talks with the Russians about undermining then-President Obama’s policy—that ought to matter to every American.

“They misled the entire country.”
Friedman: Are you encouraged by the Trump administration’s move to accept the resignation of Flynn? Do you think that means Trump’s taking the threats you just mentioned seriously?

Schiff: No, I don’t at all. And here’s what really concerns me about what Sean Spicer had to say today. The president has known for weeks, apparently, that Flynn lied. And their only question was: Did he violate the Logan Act? No one seems to be asking the question: Shouldn’t we tell the American people that they’ve been lied to? And they were completely willing to have the American public deceived. It’s only when The Washington Post broke the story that they felt they needed to act by firing Flynn. But they still have expressed no remorse for the fact that they misled the entire country and were content to do so, and were never going to correct the record unless they [were] exposed. That tells me that they have a very high tolerance for misleading the public.

Friedman: You don’t buy the argument that they were handling it internally before disclosing to the American public—that they needed to check the legal issues and—

Schiff: If by handling it, it means trying to dissemble and suppress information, perhaps. If it [means] taking a legitimate, appropriate response, there’s no evidence of that
https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... mp/516741/
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Feb 15, 2017 1:41 pm

Who Told Flynn to Call Russia?
Let’s stop focusing on the resignation, and start focusing on the real issue here: The mystery of Trump’s Russia ties.
By DANIEL BENJAMIN February 14, 2017

Hours after national security adviser Michael Flynn resigned amid reports that he misled top officials about his pre-inauguration talks with the Russian ambassador, President Donald Trump took to Twitter to encourage everyone to move on. “The real story here is why are there so many illegal leaks coming out of Washington?” he tweeted out Tuesday morning.

In a sense, Trump is right: The real story is not Flynn. But it isn’t government leaks, either. No, the “real story here” is Trump himself—and the continuing mystery of his ties to Russia.

As official Washington and the press home in on the permanent disarray in the White House, whether the disgraced Flynn broke the law and who will succeed him after his three-week tenure, the key question is getting lost in the shuffle: Who told Flynn to call Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States? Because I’m convinced Flynn didn’t do it of his own accord. Flynn is a bit player in a much larger story regarding the president’s relationship with the Kremlin, and it’s this story the press needs to focus on.

There is little doubt that Trump elevated Flynn because of his loyalty and the optics of having a recently retired three-star general parroting his views, which few other generals of that rank would consider doing. But Flynn was no grand strategist. He would not have been capable of running a complex political realignment with Russia, and he was woefully ill-cast for the role of national security adviser. An army intelligence officer who had spent most of his career in the Middle East and Afghanistan, Flynn had no background in diplomacy, not to mention Asian or European affairs. And it strains credulity that someone with such limited experience was acting on his own initiative when he spoke with Kislyak on December 29, the day of the sanctions announcement. If, as reported, he called five times in a single day, then he was on a mission, and probably not of his own devising.

My view is informed by several years of knowing and following Flynn. After being fired as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency—where he was already behaving erratically—Flynn slid into ever stranger behavior.

During a weeklong visit that I arranged for Flynn here at Dartmouth College in April 2015, he repeatedly made oddball remarks. I had known Flynn as a capable and genial colleague from my time in government, and I was surprised by the change I saw. He was warm and engaging, especially with students, but his views on Islam and the terrorist threat seemed increasingly extreme—a line about Islam not being a religion but a political ideology, which he would use frequently in later months, struck me as a sign that he had moved beyond mainstream U.S. government thinking. But what stuck out most was his fixation on Iran. His visit coincided with the sprint to the end of the framework negotiations for the nuclear deal, and Flynn declared repeatedly in public events and private discussions that Iran’s perfidy was so diabolical, it “didn’t deserve a place at the negotiating table.” When asked who should negotiate on behalf of Iran, he had no answer but insisted it shouldn’t be Iran. (Full disclosure: Despite the troubling remarks, which left faculty and students bemused, Flynn was a fine guest, meeting with everyone and, remarkably, declining the negotiated honorarium for his weeklong stay.)

Over the next year and a half, his behavior became even stranger—reckless Islamophobia, chanting “lock her up” at Trump rallies (referring to Hillary Clinton)—all bizarre for a military officer, let alone a three-star general. Recent reporting suggests he was lost in his West Wing office, too, unaware, for example, that the State Department and Congress play central roles in arms sales and clueless about how to call up the National Guard in an emergency. Phoning Kislyak—inexplicably oblivious to the likelihood that his call would be heard by U.S. intelligence—is another indication that Flynn wasn’t operating at a level one would have expected for an incoming national security adviser.

Aside from his inexperience, there is another reason to doubt that Flynn was carrying on an unauthorized dialogue with the Russians: Unlike Trump, he has no longtime, demonstrated affection for Putin. While he was at DIA from 2013 to 2014, he had tried to build a better relationship with Russian intelligence, but that by itself tells us little. Out of uniform, he accepted a paid speaking gig in Moscow and wound up at an RT dinner seated next to Putin in December 2015, raising more than a few eyebrows. (How far along he was in his courtship with candidate Trump at that point is unclear.)

But Flynn was still talking tough on Russia until late 2015. In The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and its Allies, which he co-wrote with controversial foreign policy analyst (and, I would argue, conspiracy theorist) Michael Ledeen and which came out in mid-2016, Flynn counted Russia as one of those allies. Indeed, on the second page of the book’s introduction, he included Russia with North Korea, China, Cuba and Venezuela as the “countries … who though not religious fanatics, share their hatred of the West, particularly the United States and Israel.” He later added to the list: Iran, Syria, Bolivia and Nicaragua. (This litany of purported jihadist allies is just another sign of Flynn’s seriously misguided views.)

This all brings us back to the question: If Flynn didn’t initiate the discussion, who did tell him to call Kislyak? More than that, what is the nature of Trump’s relationship with Putin, and did the two collude on the hacking of the election?

Virtually all the reporters covering the Flynn imbroglio have lost track of this glaring mystery, focusing exclusively on the former general’s improprieties. In doing so, they are doing the White House a gigantic favor.

Let’s review the bidding: Trump’s fondness for Putin and Russia remains at odds with the views of the entire national security establishment as well as scholarly Russia watchers. His recent rejoinder to Fox’s Bill O’Reilly, who called Putin “a killer,” that “You got a lot of killers. What, you think our country’s so innocent?” still has eyeballs rolling. CNN reports that elements of the notorious dossier assembled by former British spy Christopher Steele have been corroborated by U.S. investigators. And, to this day, we have no idea of Trump’s business dealings with Russia—a gap in public understanding that is simply staggering for a U.S. president.

It is hard to see how a rational person could dismiss this issue as unimportant, and hard, too, to imagine how anyone could view the hacking of the U.S. election with complacency. What, other than the physical safety of the American people, could be a more vital interest than the integrity of our elections? Yet with the issue buried in an FBI investigation and stuck behind the curtain of a Senate Select Intelligence Committee review, this issue has been lost from sight and may disappear entirely.

It’s time to have a true, bipartisan investigation, outside of Congress and insulated from White House pressure. The 9/11 Commission provides a good model. Getting that set up will be a lot healthier for our democracy than getting lost in the minutiae of the Flynn affair.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... sia-214782
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 23274
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 26 guests