Connect with us

Fake News Media

WaPo Under Scrutiny For Its Role in The Anti-General Flynn Plot

Published

on

The Washington Post is coming under scrutiny following news that Robert Mueller is not recommending prison time for President Donald Trump’s original national security adviser General Michael Flynn.

The Jeff Bezos-owned WaPo is, of course, complicit in the destruction of accurate journalism in this country according to many observers, and now in this enlightened Trump Age the people are realizing the extent to which mainstream newspapers do the bidding of the corrupt out-of-control Deep State. (READ: Washington Post Quotes McCain Flunky Who Passed On Debunked Trump Dossier).

Julie Kelly writes on Twitter, “It’s interesting to reread the press coverage on Flynn as this went down in 2/2017. Who orchestrated his downfall? Yates, Clapper and Brennan What journo first reported the anonymous and illegal leaks on Flynn’s convos? WashPo Adam Entous…The same Adam Entous believed to be one of the journos cited in the James Wolfe indictment and who broke the story on Carter Page’s FISA…”

Trending: “RELEASE THEM ALL:” Tucker Exposes Full Biden Jailbreak Order for Illegal Aliens

Here’s what the WaPo’s Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima, and Philip Rucker reported on February 13, 2017, as the Deep State was claiming its first principled America-loving scalp in the Trump White House:

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said.

The message, delivered by Sally Q. Yates and a senior career national security official to the White House counsel, was prompted by concerns that Flynn, when asked about his calls and texts with the Russian diplomat, had told Vice President-elect Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the 2016 election, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the information.

Flynn resigned Monday night in the wake of revelations about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.

In the waning days of the Obama administration, James R. Clapper Jr., who was the director of national intelligence, and John Brennan, the CIA director at the time, shared Yates’s concerns and concurred with her recommendation to inform the Trump White House. They feared that “Flynn had put himself in a compromising position” and thought that Pence had a right to know that he had been misled, according to one of the officials, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

A senior Trump administration official said before Flynn’s resignation that the White House was aware of the matter, adding that “we’ve been working on this for weeks.”

Washington Post passage ends

I reported in detail how Peter Strzok and Sally Yates took down General Flynn in a plot that also involved — directly or not — Vice President Mike Pence. As I wrote in my piece “NOT GUILTY: How Peter Strzok SET UP General Flynn”:

As President Donald Trump calls for an end to the Robert Mueller investigation based on former Mueller team member Peter Strzok’s blatant unlawful attempts to personally target Trump, the case against General Michael Flynn is also becoming more precarious due to Strzok’s involvement.

In fact, Strzok personally set up General Flynn, the original Trump White House national security adviser.

On January 24, 2017, Peter Strzok interviewed General Michael Flynn inside the White House alongside another agent. Flynn’s lawyer was not present. Flynn apparently did not tell the White House about his meeting. Guess who did? Sally Yates, the anti-Trump deputy attorney general whose underling told the FBI to shut down the Clinton Foundation case. Yates informed the White House on January 26 that Flynn met with the FBI.

That was the beginning of the end for the original Trump White House.

Strzok was close personal friends with the foreign intelligence judge Rudolph Contreras who accepted General Flynn’s guilty plea. Contreras recused himself after he already accepted Flynn’s guilty plea.

Strzok and Page detailed their plan to meet with Contreras in a July 25, 2016 series of texts:

PAGE: “Rudy is on the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]! Did you know that? Just appointed two months ago.”
STRZOK: “I did. I need to get together with him.”
PAGE: “said he’d gotten on a month or two ago at a graduation party we were both at.”

Mueller reportedly coerced Flynn into pleading guilty by threatening the general’s son Mike Flynn Jr., whom Hillary Clinton clearly referred to in a tweet expressing anger at Flynn Jr. for tweeting about the Comet Pizza-Gate story.

Evidence now clearly shows that General Michael Flynn was targeted for prosecution under a charge of lying to federal investigators because Robert Mueller was trying to flip him into participating in the “Russia” probe against President Donald Trump.

Flynn, who was felled by his alleged lie to Vice President Pence, was the first scalp claimed by the media in the Trump administration, which opened up the floodgates for a while on administration firings before Trump recently consolidated more control of his administration.

Peter D’Abrosca reported: The latest bit of explosive information from special counsel Robert S. Mueller’s investigation shows that the FBI deliberately chose to prosecute General Michael Flynn, though they had no reason to believe he was lying to them.

On Friday, the House Intelligence Committee released an unredacted version of their final report on Russia, and the unredacted documents tell a completely different story than their redacted counterparts.

“Deputy Director McCabe stated that, ‘we really had not substantiated anything particularly significant against General Flynn,’” says the newly unredacted version of the document.

But why would this have been redacted in the first place? The public was under the impression that Flynn lied to the FBI. McCabe says plainly that that there was no case against Flynn.

“The two people who interviewed [Flynn] didn’t think he was lying, [which] was not [a] great beginning of a false statement case,” McCabe told the House Intel Committee.

But it gets worse. Disgraced former FBI director James Comey was in on the scheme.

“Director Comey testified to the Committee that ‘the agents…discerned no physical indications of deception,’” the original redacted report says. “They didn’t see any change in posture, in tone, in inflection, in eye contact. They saw nothing that indicated to them that he knew he was lying to them.”

“General Flynn pleaded guilty to making a false statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding his December 2016 conversations with Ambassador Kislyak, even though the Federal Bureau of Investigation agents did not detect any deception during Flynn’s interview,” it continues.

But the Mueller tactics did box the Flynn family into a legal corner and a financial hole, as it was supposed to. We also reported that General Flynn was forced to put his house up for sale in order to meet the constant requirements of his legal bills.

Fake News Media

FAKE NEWS DEBUNKED: ‘Zip Tie Guy’ at Capitol Protest Merely Picked up the Restraints From a Table

It was a mostly-peaceful protest by ANTIFA/BLM standards.

Published

on

One insidious piece of fake news that circulated widely after the Jan. 6 siege on the U.S. Capitol is that there was a protester with zip ties who was among the individuals who dared to enter the holy grounds on that fateful day.

This was used by dishonest left-wing pundits and lying government officials to claim that the Trump supporters were engaged in an insurrection and a coup on Jan. 6.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

However, it has since come out that there was not any individual who brought zip ties to the U.S. Capitol protest to kidnap federal officials.

After deceiving the public for weeks, prosecutors were forced to admit in court that a man seen with the alleged zip ties had actually taken plastic handcuffs from police. While this may be a crime, it shows that there was no harmful intent from the protesters, most of whom demonstrated peacefully in and around the U.S. Capitol.

Eric Munchel, a U.S. Capitol protester who has been maligned falsely as the ‘Zip Tie Guy,’ reportedly grabbed the handcuffs off from a table. The new court filing explains what occurred.

“At one point, MUNCHEL spots plastic handcuffs on a table inside a hallway in the Capitol. MUNCHEL exclaims, ‘zipties. I need to get me some of them motherf—ers,” and grabs several white plastic handcuffs from on top of a cabinet,” the filing states, adding: “As MUNCHEL and [his mother, Lisa Eisenhart,] are attempting to leave, Eisenhart says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t carry the zip ties, just get ’em out of their hand.'”

It appears that Munchel and his mother, Lisa Eisenhart, were simply trying to prevent the plastic handcuffs from being used to detain patriots at the scene. As the case is heard in court, more details about the case will be heard, and the full truth can be determined.

Big League Politics has attempted to debunk a lot of the spin, which is coming from liberals and conservatives alike, surrounding the Jan. 6 Capitol siege:

Less than a week after the infamous U.S. Capitol siege took place, many conservative talking heads – perhaps in an attempt to protect President Donald Trump from the nuclear fall-out – are claiming that ANTIFA terrorists were responsible for the mayhem that ultimately resulted in five people dead…

However, investigative work by Big League Politics shows that there is no real evidence showing that this event was promulgated or set up by ANTIFA and the political establishment.

In fact, there is more evidence showing that this was a spontaneous uprising of angry patriots who have been pushed past the breaking point.

As a reporter who was embedded in the thick of the chaotic scene, I personally witnessed protesters singing “God Bless America” and “I’m Proud to be an American” while they were being tear gassed and flash banged by authorities.

Protesters were risking life and limb to climb up scaffolding to wave the American flag and boldly display their patriotism. Chants included “USA! USA!” and “We the People,” with constitutional iconography being found everywhere…

Does this seem like the optics of an ANTIFA rally, or a pro-American uprising? Big Tech entities are scrambling to censor footage of the rally so that they can control the narrative about what actually took place, so people cannot understand this was a pro-freedom revival in the vein of the Founding Fathers.

Additionally, much of the “evidence” showing that prominent protesters seen inside the Capitol were ANTIFA has already been debunked.

While the Capitol siege may have been seen as destructive and drastic, what is really destructive and drastic is the behavior committed by Congress selling ordinary Americans out for decades. The Capitol demonstrators ought to be punished as harshly as the ANTIFA thugs who attacked Trump’s inauguration in 2017 for their mostly peaceful protest.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending