Quote: 

 

The New York Times and Washington Post reported that the transcript of the phone call reviewed over the weekend by the White House could be read different ways. One White House official with knowledge of the conversations told me that the Russian ambassador raised the sanctions to Flynn and that Flynn responded that the Trump team would be taking office in a few weeks and would review Russia policy and sanctions. That's neither illegal nor improper
.  

Quote: 

Normally intercepts of U.S. officials and citizens are some of the most tightly held government secrets
. This is for good reason. Selectively disclosing details of private conversations monitored by the FBI or NSA gives the permanent state the power to destroy reputations from the cloak of anonymity. This is what police states do.

 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,64);font-family:Tiempos, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:17px;">In the past it was considered scandalous for senior U.S. officials to even request the identities of U.S. officials incidentally monitored by the government (normally they are redacted from intelligence reports). John Bolton's nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations was derailed in 2006 after the NSA confirmed he had made 10 such requests when he was Undersecretary of State for Arms Control in George W. Bush's first term. The fact that the intercepts of Flynn's conversations with Kislyak appear to have been widely distributed inside the government is a red flag.

Quote: 

It's also possible that a group of national security bureaucrats and former Obama officials are selectively leaking highly sensitive law enforcement information to undermine the elected government.


 

<p style="color:rgb(51,51,64);font-family:Tiempos, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:17px;">Flynn was a fat target for the national security state.