THE FLYNN THING AND DYEING THE WATERS… A STING OPERATION?
I
rarely cover much U.S. domestic politics on this website because, well,
frankly, because it's both depressing and hysterical (in the humorous
sense), all at the same time. That is the cost, I suppose, of running an
empire on corruption, blackmail, globaloneyism, and just plain old
fashioned Rockefailure-Soros stupidity for so long. Now, as I've been
given to understand the whole episode of the Flynn resignation, he
didn't do much more than have a telephone conversation with a Russian
diplomat, during which the Russian asked about sanctions(See
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/02/make-firing-michael-flynn.html),
and Flynn responded that it would have to be taken up once the then
President-elect was in office. Forgive me, but that sort of thing is
what I thought national security advisors were supposed to do. But then
the whole thing exploded into this corporate controlled media circus
that President Trump is being influenced by the
always-byzantine-never-to-be-trusted Russians and their evil
Machiavellian criminal super-genius, Vladimir Putin, who, for the
moment, has replaced the "Israel-and-the-Zionists-are-behind-everything"
meme with the "Vladimir Putin is behind everything" meme. Next week it
may be the Jesuits-are-behind-everything meme (and let's not forget,
Pope Francis is a Jesuit! Q.E.D.)
Now,
I'll believe that President Trump is a Russian agent when he builds his
first high-rise casino in Moscow with the evil Machiavellian criminal
super genius Vladimir Putin present at the ribbon cutting along with the
balalaika band, and with a major equity stake in said casino (and hey,
they have lots of Eskimos in Russia, so it could be an Indian casino,
and everyone will be happy because it will be politically correct.
That's a hint, Vlad. With careful planning, this could become a major modus operandi
of the Trump-Putin cabal, giving new meaning to the phrase "pay to
play" as Trump high rise casinos go up all over the world.). And our
wonderful always-informed-and-always-to-be-trusted corporate controlled
media seem conveniently to have forgotten Darth Hillary's little uranium
sales and so on to Russia(See Russia? Look who’s really in bed with Moscow),
not to mention the money that allegedly flowed into the Clinton coffers
from Angela Merkel's Germany (German taxpayer money, as I recall,see Merkel BACKED Hillary: Clinton Foundation received £4M German taxpayer cash pre-election), not to mention the (out)house of Saud. Nothing to see here, no foreign influence here, folks. Move along.
All
that said, something about the Flynn thing has bothered me since it
first surfaced, and that is that it seems to have all the hallmarks of a
classic sting operation: the level of predictable outrage far exceeded
the scale of the alleged breech by Flynn. Now, while I've shared that
suspicion with a few friends privately, when I opened up my emails
preparing to schedule this week's blogs, I found the following
intriguing article that was shared by Mr. G.L.R., and it outlines my
suspicions far better than I ever could:
http://ronfor37.org/2017/02/15/is-the-flynn-resignation-a-sting/
(You'll have to copy and paste this link into your browser, as the
linking function would not work for some reason.)
Now,
what always bothered me about the Flynn affair was something this
article brings out: Flynn would hardly have been unaware that his
conversations were being "listened to" by American intelligence, and it
was this factor that led me to entertain my suspicion that the whole
thing was a sting operation to begin with, a point which the article
itself brings out, citing no less than the New York Times
itself. But now comes the cruncher: the press, supposedly basing its
stories on "inside sources", cannot get the story's details straight, an
egregious example of "BMLS" (Benghazi Memory Lapse Syndrome). Well,
after all, "at this point, what difference does it make?" Well, the
difference, the problem, as the article points out, is this:
A foolproof method of identifying someone talking to the press is to give him a specific story. If that story is published, you know where it came from, because it’s a unique story. Why would the intelligence officials have so many different stories if they read the same transcripts? The only possible answer is that each official was given a different transcript. Why would the intelligence officials have so many different stories if they read the same transcripts?The FBI cleared Flynn on January 23. The “leaks” were published February 9. So Trump has everything he needs to reform the CIA, NSA, etc.The FBI and Senate Intelligence Committee are going to investigate now. Trump ran his own sting a month back, when he identified intelligence officials as leakers. Trump warned them that this was illegal. It appears he’s taken dramatic action. The end.(Emphasis added)
Now,
years and years ago, I wrote an historical novel(only a part of which
was ever published, and self-published at that), in which the villain
just happens to be the head of the Byzantine Empire's intelligence and
foreign service (the Bureau of Barbarians). This individual suspected
that the Emperor Charlemagne had a spy in the Byzantine Imperial court,
but did not know who. So, he held a party, during which he pretended to
let various suspects know that he had a spy in Charlemagne's court, but
to each suspect, he told a different name of his spy. When
Charlemagne executed a particular individual for espionage and treason,
the Byzantine spymaster knew who among his suspects was the spy. It's a
classic case of what people in spy craft call "dying the waters." In
this case, if the article is correct, and various people were shown different transcripts, then several waters were dyed, and several "sources" for the leaks are implied. And if this was
a sting operation of this sort, then it also has enormous implications
for political fallout as well, for with congressional investigations
pending, those within both parties who are opposed to the administration
of Mr. Trump, will be confronted with some embarrassing information...
But that, of course, is all high octane speculation. Time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment