Flippin In-Flynn-Er-ation, Durak-Gate?
Unlike last week in being a day late, this week a day early? Some things just can't wait.. and expanding to two days this week... some things just can't be contained...
Once again, not to be mistaken for Tuesday's With Morrie, it's Tuesdays With Trump... Continuing yesterday's timeline from Flynn Rolls Over? Durak-gate.
Due to an ongoing investigation, POTUS and White House council McGahn decided not to tell VP Pence about Flynn being a risk?
Homey don't think so, because another high ranking White House staff member also knew. Here's the real rub, and you never rub a man's rhubarb the wrong way...
Two weeks prior to the January 26th Yates briefing of POTUS and McGahn, and prior to VP Pence's claims of ignorance of the Flynn Kislyak phone conversations and meetings....
On January 12th, 2017 David Ignatius WAPO op-ed piece let everyone in the free world know about Flynn's Russian salad dressing and potential compromise.
On January 14, 2017, Flynn reportedly told VP Pence he had NOT discussed sanctions with Kislyak.
Wonder why he did that, perhaps Pence asked him because he had been briefed about allegations in the Op-ed? In one way or another, VP Pence knew that Flynn had.
Flynn was reportedly interviewed by the FBI on January 24, 2017. It is not clear whether he was truthful about the content of his conversations with Kislyak.
Two days later, on January 26, 2017 Yates briefed White House council McGahn and POTUS that Flynn was a risk, and the subject of an ongoing investigation.
Four days later, on January 30, 2017 Yates is terminated by POTUS.
In a February 8, 2017 interview with the WaPo, Flynn “categorically denied discussing sanctions” with Kislyak. The next day, VP Pence claims to have discovered Flynn's omissions, for which he must of questioned him 26 days earlier, just a little slow?
On February 9, 2017, citing “current and former American officials,” the NYT reported that Flynn had indeed discussed sanctions and areas of possible cooperation with Kislyak during a late December call.
The following day, on February 10, 2017, Trump tells reporters on Air Force One that he will “look into” reports concerning Flynn misleading administration officials about his contacts with Kislyak.
Funny thing is... On February 14, 2017, according to Sean Spicer, the 18 day delay between notification and Trump’s request for Flynn’s resignation was driven by a need to evaluate the truthfulness of Flynn’s statements to Pence:
In a February 19, 2017 appearance on Meet the Press, Reince Priebus offered his account of the Yates-Flynn timeline, with an admission to learning he had been misled "sometime after January 27th" or the day after the Yates briefing. DOH!!!
So for that investigation to occur, POTUS who was briefed on Jan 26th, had to know. But who told the Chief of Staff, and not the VP? In both the case of January 12th and at the latest January 26th, claims that VP Pence and POTUS did not know can be put to rest.
Is one is expected to believe that the Attorney General, White House council, Chief of Staff and POTUS knew, but the VP did not? Never mind the evaluation for the truthfullness of Flynn's statements to Pence...
which was in progress from January 26th, without letting the VP in on it until February 9th? 14 days were spent asking everybody but the VP? And exactly who was asked about a private conversation between VP Pence and Flynn? Really?
The public just acts and votes stupid, aside from Trump's disingenuous February 10th response... POTUS firing of AG Yates could be tantamount to interference, and both VP Pence and POTUS claims of ignorance could be considered false statements, in regard to an ongoing investigation.
Given the abridged timeline above, which borrows largely from a detailed one courtesy of Senator Feinstein's office, any and all of the above could be considered obstruction of justice. TBD. Moving West of levity...
Now I mis-take you, what part of Fatherland are you from? Do you work for CONTROL or CHAOS? Not safe to communicate here, now we speak with transparency and in private please....
Seriously folks, here's the next sign post up ahead, FOMC raise on 13th, tax cut for the 1% gets scuttled between Senate and House, AND the other part of Flynn's probable deal…
Testimony in which Flynn rolls over on some much bigger fish, to be revealed perhaps as a big fat DOJ XMAS present? Like we said February 2017, In-Flynn-er-ation.
Interesting Codicil: Durak is a Russian card game, in which one can opt not to cut the deck by saying "Nye snimayu shapkee Doo-rah-kam" ("I do not tip my hat to idiots").
There are variations such as Pros-toy (simple), Pod-kid-noy (underhanded, throw in) and Pe-re-vod-noy (passing the buck).
The former is what politicians look for in an electorate, the latter two are how the politicians will act, and most apropos of all, Durak means stupid or fool.
Stay tuned and stay thirsty, Out.
Once again, not to be mistaken for Tuesday's With Morrie, it's Tuesdays With Trump... Continuing yesterday's timeline from Flynn Rolls Over? Durak-gate.
Due to an ongoing investigation, POTUS and White House council McGahn decided not to tell VP Pence about Flynn being a risk?
Homey don't think so, because another high ranking White House staff member also knew. Here's the real rub, and you never rub a man's rhubarb the wrong way...
Two weeks prior to the January 26th Yates briefing of POTUS and McGahn, and prior to VP Pence's claims of ignorance of the Flynn Kislyak phone conversations and meetings....
On January 12th, 2017 David Ignatius WAPO op-ed piece let everyone in the free world know about Flynn's Russian salad dressing and potential compromise.
On January 14, 2017, Flynn reportedly told VP Pence he had NOT discussed sanctions with Kislyak.
Wonder why he did that, perhaps Pence asked him because he had been briefed about allegations in the Op-ed? In one way or another, VP Pence knew that Flynn had.
Flynn was reportedly interviewed by the FBI on January 24, 2017. It is not clear whether he was truthful about the content of his conversations with Kislyak.
Two days later, on January 26, 2017 Yates briefed White House council McGahn and POTUS that Flynn was a risk, and the subject of an ongoing investigation.
Four days later, on January 30, 2017 Yates is terminated by POTUS.
In a February 8, 2017 interview with the WaPo, Flynn “categorically denied discussing sanctions” with Kislyak. The next day, VP Pence claims to have discovered Flynn's omissions, for which he must of questioned him 26 days earlier, just a little slow?
On February 9, 2017, citing “current and former American officials,” the NYT reported that Flynn had indeed discussed sanctions and areas of possible cooperation with Kislyak during a late December call.
The following day, on February 10, 2017, Trump tells reporters on Air Force One that he will “look into” reports concerning Flynn misleading administration officials about his contacts with Kislyak.
"I don’t know about that. I haven’t seen it." - Liar, Liar, Pants on FireOn Feb 12th, the Yates story broke, on Feb 13th Flynn resigned.
Funny thing is... On February 14, 2017, according to Sean Spicer, the 18 day delay between notification and Trump’s request for Flynn’s resignation was driven by a need to evaluate the truthfulness of Flynn’s statements to Pence:
"Whether or not he actually misled the Vice President was the issue, and that was ultimately what led to the President asking for and accepting the resignation of General Flynn. That’s it, pure and simple. It was a matter of trust." - White House Press Secretary Sean SpicerA matter of trust? Confirming that POTUS and other senior staff members knew...
In a February 19, 2017 appearance on Meet the Press, Reince Priebus offered his account of the Yates-Flynn timeline, with an admission to learning he had been misled "sometime after January 27th" or the day after the Yates briefing. DOH!!!
So for that investigation to occur, POTUS who was briefed on Jan 26th, had to know. But who told the Chief of Staff, and not the VP? In both the case of January 12th and at the latest January 26th, claims that VP Pence and POTUS did not know can be put to rest.
Is one is expected to believe that the Attorney General, White House council, Chief of Staff and POTUS knew, but the VP did not? Never mind the evaluation for the truthfullness of Flynn's statements to Pence...
which was in progress from January 26th, without letting the VP in on it until February 9th? 14 days were spent asking everybody but the VP? And exactly who was asked about a private conversation between VP Pence and Flynn? Really?
The public just acts and votes stupid, aside from Trump's disingenuous February 10th response... POTUS firing of AG Yates could be tantamount to interference, and both VP Pence and POTUS claims of ignorance could be considered false statements, in regard to an ongoing investigation.
Given the abridged timeline above, which borrows largely from a detailed one courtesy of Senator Feinstein's office, any and all of the above could be considered obstruction of justice. TBD. Moving West of levity...
Now I mis-take you, what part of Fatherland are you from? Do you work for CONTROL or CHAOS? Not safe to communicate here, now we speak with transparency and in private please....
Seriously folks, here's the next sign post up ahead, FOMC raise on 13th, tax cut for the 1% gets scuttled between Senate and House, AND the other part of Flynn's probable deal…
Testimony in which Flynn rolls over on some much bigger fish, to be revealed perhaps as a big fat DOJ XMAS present? Like we said February 2017, In-Flynn-er-ation.
Interesting Codicil: Durak is a Russian card game, in which one can opt not to cut the deck by saying "Nye snimayu shapkee Doo-rah-kam" ("I do not tip my hat to idiots").
There are variations such as Pros-toy (simple), Pod-kid-noy (underhanded, throw in) and Pe-re-vod-noy (passing the buck).
The former is what politicians look for in an electorate, the latter two are how the politicians will act, and most apropos of all, Durak means stupid or fool.
Stay tuned and stay thirsty, Out.
Comments