Probe Into Russia Hoax Origins in ‘Full Throttle’

From Gregg Jarrett:

Richard Grenell, the acting Director of National Intelligence has declassified information as to which Obama administration officials were behind the “unmasking” of Flynn, “whose calls with the former Russian Ambassador during the presidential transition were picked up in surveillance and later leaked- and their names could soon be made public” a source told Fox News.
Unmasking has become a prevalent term as of late. “Unmasking occurs after U.S. citizens’ conversations are incidentally picked up in conversations with foreign officials who are being monitored by the intelligence community” reports Fox News. However, the “U.S. citizens’ identities are supposed to be protected if their participation is incidental and no wrongdoing is suspected.”

It has been determined that “officials in the Obama administration have acknowledged that they unmasked some Americans in intelligence reports, but insisted that their reasons were legitimate.” The only problem is, it’s too easy to claim legitimacy when bias is fueling one’s reasoning. According to ABC News, “former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice has openly acknowledged unmasking the identities of some senior Trump officials during the presidential transition but has strenuously denied ever leaking any identities and said nothing she did was politically motivated.”

Susan Rice declaring she was not politically motivated, during the contentious election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton? Doubtful. The Justice Department has said after reviewing newly disclosed materials they agree that Flynn’s “January 24, 2017 interview with the FBI should never have taken place because he had not had inappropriate contacts with Russians. The interview, the department said, was ‘conducted without any legitimate investigative basis” reported Fox News. (Read more.)

From The Federalist:

The unsealing last week of a series of documents in the Michael Flynn criminal case cemented the reality that a small cadre of high-level FBI agents set a perjury trap for President Trump’s then-national security advisor. Beyond exposing the depth of this despicable personal and political hit job on a 30-year military veteran, the newly discovered documents hold great legal significance. Here’s your legal primer. 

The Russiagate special counsel’s office charged Flynn with violating 18 U. S. C. § 1001, which makes it a federal crime to “knowingly and willfully” make a false statement of “a material fact” to a federal official. Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team claimed Flynn violated Section 1001 by lying to FBI agents Joe Pientka and Peter Strzok—the latter of whom has since been fired—when the duo questioned Flynn on January 24, 2017, about Flynn’s December 2016 telephone conversations with the Russian ambassador. (Read more.) 

From Trending Politics:

In yet another stunning example of how the judicial system has been perverted by politics, a federal judge will not honor the DOJ's request to swiftly dismiss the case against General Michael Flynn. On Tuesday, Judge Emmet Sullivan delivered a peculiar decision to stall the exoneration of the framed former national security adviser in order to allow for outside parties to file briefs intended to undermine the DOJ and leave Gen. Flynn twisting in the wind indefinitely. (Read more.) 

From Real Clear Politics:

Sen. Rand Paul called for acting Director of National Intelligence Rick Grenell to testify about a list of Obama administration officials, including Obama and Biden, involved in the "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's communications after the 2016 election. 

Speaking to members of the press, Paul also said he wanted testimony from the officials on the list, including James Comey and James Clapper. 

"These rumors have been going around for years that Obama's administration was abusing te power of unmasking, and this sounds like they were using it to go after a political opponent, which is a serious offense and should be investigated," Paul said. "The fact that Vice President Biden is directly involved in the unmasking of a political opponent -- think about it. You remember impeachment? They said the president was using the government to go after a political opponent? This is Vice President Biden using the spying powers of the U.S. to go after a political opponent and he is caught red-handed here... eavesdropping on a political opponent's phone calls." 

"Every reporter in the country needs to ask this legitimate question. They need to come out of hibernation and ask Vice President Biden, do we think it is a legitimate function of government to eavesdrop on political opponents, illegally unmask them and listen to their private conversation?" (Read more.) 

Share