Read on Twitter
Fasten Seatbelts. The call that General Flynn had with Kislyak was likely obtained using a warrant in a previously unannounced criminal investigation.
On May 13th, Catherine Herridge released the names of individuals who made unmasking requests for calls, that resulted in the unmasking of General Michael Flynn.
Curiously, folks quickly realized that there were no unmasking requests surrounding the date of the now infamous call with Ambassador Kislyak. https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1260635872271228928
The DOJ recently filed a motion to dismiss the “Criminal Information Against Defendant Michael T. Flynn”. Taken from the exhibits in the filing are the following excerpts from Mary McCord, Sally Yates, and James Comey.
After the details of the call are leaked to the Washington Post, VPOTUS and Spicer say that the communications had only involved logistics. James Comey then tells members of DOJ leadership of their investigation into Gen. Flynn and senior officials at the FBI and the DOJ (cont)
have concerns that the descriptions of the calls isn’t accurate. The DOJ and Sally Yates tell Comey that they should inform the incoming administration that there is a discrepancy. James Comey wants to keep it a secret.
Yates gets frustrated when Comey’ justifications for holding the information back “morph”. They morph between compromising a counterintelligence investigation – one that should have been closed already – and possibly compromising a criminal investigation.
Mary McCord says FBI maintained the information (transcripts) and would not refer a matter to themselves:
McCord says that Priestap told them they did not want to insinuate the existence of a criminal investigation. That may seem like a lot- there's more:
Here there are redactions about how the FBI obtained the transcripts of the call:
Here again, they make sure to clarify that this is “FBI Information”
Here’s where things get more interesting. It is the first time we learn there is both a criminal and counterintelligence investigation ongoing. I submit that the criminal investigation was ongoing back in December 2016. It’s the reason why Comey “morphs” between the two.
McCord knows there is both a criminal investigation and a counterintelligence one at the LATEST 2/16/17.
Now lets examine Yates. The day before inaugurations, Cohen tells her that Comey had said there is a “criminal” investigation into General Flynn.
The fact that Yates references the NSD here, makes me think that the FBI had an open criminal investigation into the FARA accusations against General Flynn early on- before the December call to Kislyak. The implications of this are STUNNING.
Yates wont answer McGahn when he asks if the investigation is criminal in nature. Remember, we have all been told thus far this is a counterintelligence investigation ONLY.
She knows at the time there was “No official decision on prosecution”. Ultimately, they must have decided not to prosecute General Flynn—another hugely significant issue in his current case given the posture of the prosecutors against his son and business partner.
And now Comey, from his interview in front of the HPSCI on 3/2/17. BEFORE the SC is appointed.
"That’s a ton of assumptions", you may say. Well, here is where those assumptions go out the window. I have evidence that they obtained search warrants on General Flynn in regards to the call with Kislyak.
On October 11, 2019 the AP, Wapo, Politico, CNN and the NYT filed a lawsuit for “Access to certain search warrant materials":
The warrants they reference are in regards to General Flynn’s call with Sergei Kislyak:
“Big deal anyone can file a lawsuit looking for things like this”. I’d actually venture these news organizations have known this the entire time and they were prodded to start poking around for some reason. The case sat dormant for a bit. There have been some status updates.
The last one is interesting. Filed on 4/29/20 it acknowledges the existence of said warrants and that there is an ongoing redaction process happening before the warrant materials will be released.
That means, there were WARRANTS related to the initial comlaint – about the Kislyak call. It also means that THAT is how the FBI got the call and it didn’t need to be unmasked- there was an ONGOING CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, likely in re: to FARA, that yielded NO CHARGES:
They aren't asking for the contents of the returns anymore. How convenient. THIS is how they got the call with Kislyak. REGULAR WARRANTS.
Addendum: I spoke to some folks who will remain anon. It is INSANELY difficult to get a Title 3 warrant in the criminal justice system, which is what would’ve been required here. There are still some things missing. IMO- we will know more once the warrants are produced
