It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Leaked Email Shows KT McFarland Knew About Flynn-Kislyak Call, Lied to Congress

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   
A few minutes ago, The New York Times published an article citing emails it obtained which, if are as described, prove that at the very least KT McFarland and one other transition official knew that Flynn was making his December 29th call to Kislyak.

Those emails would also prove that McFarland lied to Congress.

McFarland Contradicted Herself on Russia Contacts, Congressional Testimony Shows


As part of the confirmation process, Ms. McFarland testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in July. After the hearing, Senator Cory Booker, Democrat of New Jersey, asked her in writing: “Did you ever discuss any of General Flynn’s contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak directly with General Flynn?”

“I am not aware of any of the issues or events as described above,” Ms. McFarland replied.

But emails obtained by The New York Times appear to undermine those statements. In a Dec. 29 message about newly imposed Obama administration sanctions against Russia for its election interference, Ms. McFarland, then serving on Mr. Trump’s transition team, told another transition official that Mr. Flynn would be talking to the Russian ambassador that evening.


I wonder who the other official is and if these two have been interviewed by FBI agents. If so, did they also lie as Flynn did? This is why Flynn flipping is really bad news for Team Trump regardless of anything he may know about possible collusion. I'll go ahead and make the prediction right now that Ms. McFarland will not be having any Senate confirmation for ambassador to Singapore.

Will she be the next domino? And what happens when she falls over on somebody even closer to Trump — say Kushner or Bannon? Interesting that they didn't name the other person in the email exchange. Could it be that they were asked to sit on it?

Mueller is draining the swamp like it's Curse of Oak Island season 4.
edit on 2017-12-4 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

are you on about the logan act?

is that the bombshell?



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

The only thing that strikes me as odd is the context. Was McFarland asked in the context of then-candidate-Trump or as President-elect? Perhaps it was a generalized question. IDK, context matters however.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Here's what's odd.

Why the last administration sanctioned Russia when it's a GD year later with no effing proof they did anything.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:15 PM
link   
So this is a bombshell
but Peter Strzok is just some guy. Your silence on the new revelations about him is deafening. Partisan my ass.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

which fbi agent was involved?
that is actually important now....

the former admins house of cards is falling



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

No. I didn't make mention of the Logan Act at all. I don't see it as being particularly worthy of discussion as the chances of anyone ever being prosecuted for violating the Logan Act are basically nil.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Btw we just established in another thread that lying to congress is apparently not a crime. Unless you want add Hillary into the mix again. I love the double standard.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:20 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I love the smell of bias in the mornings.

What was the substance of Flynns conversation?

'' please done do any knee jerk reactions to Obama's final few actions before his term is up. Be patient and dont react''

Boy o Boy I love the nonsense you spew!



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:23 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

then what is illegal?



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Btw we just established in another thread that lying to congress is apparently not a crime. Unless you want add Hillary into the mix again. I love the double standard.


No No No..

see, its only a crime if it negatively effects Trump and his administration

You're not allowed to talk about the Clintons or their lies or their crimes.. that doesnt work in these threads.

Focus on Trump, he won (when the left wanted Clinton) therefore its all fair game against Trump

.. but not Clinton.. leave her out of this.

repeat,

Clinton negative stories - bad
Trump negative stories - great - continue

Clinton - BAD
Trump - GREAT

if you need a refresher you can contact me at

SethRich@dead.com



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

What they show as being in the email does not prove that she was lying.
She was asked if she spoke about the contacts directly with Flynn.
The purported email doesn't seem to indicate that she did. It indicates that she expected that Flynn would meet the Russian. A bit of difference there.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:27 PM
link   
This thing just keeps flip flopping back and forth endlessly. Ever wonder why this stuff is being made so public? So people continue to be reeled in so that the arguing never stops. Months of this crap and where has it gotten us? People are more worried about this than net neutrality which is sad.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: theantediluvian

The only thing that strikes me as odd is the context. Was McFarland asked in the context of then-candidate-Trump or as President-elect? Perhaps it was a generalized question. IDK, context matters however.



This candidate/president-elect thing is a ridiculous red herring. All of the contacts between Flynn and Kislyak that I can think of came after Trump was elected.

A timeline of Michael Flynn's contacts with Russia, his ouster and guilty plea

This is something that people reflexively grabbed onto because of Brian Ross's slip-up and the mistaken belief that it somehow made Flynn flipping "fake news." Anyway, I digress. It's a moot point with McFarland because she wasn't part of the campaign. She joined the transition team on November 25, 2016.

Corey Booker's question therefore couldn't reasonable refer to anything pre-election.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Yes Flynn flipping is bad but not for the Trump administration. Do you think it's coincidence that Flynn going for a plea deal revealed the names of Peter Strzok and his # buddy Lisa Page? You're hilarious i give you that.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: theantediluvian

The only thing that strikes me as odd is the context. Was McFarland asked in the context of then-candidate-Trump or as President-elect? Perhaps it was a generalized question. IDK, context matters however.



This candidate/president-elect thing is a ridiculous red herring. All of the contacts between Flynn and Kislyak that I can think of came after Trump was elected.

A timeline of Michael Flynn's contacts with Russia, his ouster and guilty plea

This is something that people reflexively grabbed onto because of Brian Ross's slip-up and the mistaken belief that it somehow made Flynn flipping "fake news." Anyway, I digress. It's a moot point with McFarland because she wasn't part of the campaign. She joined the transition team on November 25, 2016.

Corey Booker's question therefore couldn't reasonable refer to anything pre-election.


Obama admin approved the calls. Boom there goes your narrative. Thanks for playing. Next.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Wow guys, it's just politics as usual no matter what side youre on...don't take it all so personally.


edit on 4-12-2017 by Thorneblood because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: theantediluvian

What they show as being in the email does not prove that she was lying.
She was asked if she spoke about the contacts directly with Flynn.
The purported email doesn't seem to indicate that she did. It indicates that she expected that Flynn would meet the Russian. A bit of difference there.


She was asked if she had discussed them with Flynn directly but her response was that she had no knowledge of "any of these events or issues."

Furthermore, it's already been reported independently by multiple sources that KT McFarland is the unnamed transition official referred to as "PTT" in the Flynn plea deal (here's a couple: Fox News, CBS News) who Flynn spoke with at Mar-A-Lago regarding the sanctions call to Kislyak.

Not sure what you're getting at with "would meet the Russian" as it doesn't say "meet" and we all know that on Dec 29th Flynn called Kislyak to discuss the sanctions.



posted on Dec, 4 2017 @ 07:55 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Here a trusted source at least for you i guess. It's on YT aswell. Your bombshell is reduced to a dud. Better luck next time.


white-house-claims-obama-a dmin-approved-flynn-calls-with-russian




top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join