The Washington Post newspaper and its reporter, David Ignatius, are under federal investigation over leaked intelligence information involving former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
National Security Letters were issued for:
- Landline phone records for the entire Washington Post and its reporter, David Ignatius' home phone,
- Cellular phone records including GPS location information for all Washington Post Cellphones and any personal cellphones of its reporter, David Ignatius.
- Copies of emails sent to or from the Washington Post within a specific time frame, and also for it's reporter, David Ignatius' home/personal email account(s).
- Credit Card transactions for Reporter David Ignatius.
While not a complete list, some of the telephone numbers being looked at include:
Also, some of the e-mail addresses being looked at include:
In addition, surveillance camera footage from a plethora of locations near the Washington Post is being scanned with facial recognition software to determine who went to/from the newspaper within certain time frames.
Moreover, government phone records from ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES including the Department of Justice and the federal courts, are being scanned for outbound call listings and inbound caller ID listings to determine the source(s) of leaked intelligence information about phone calls between Flynn and the Ambassador of Russia.
Ignatius joined The Post in 1986 as editor of its Sunday Outlook section. In 1990 he became foreign editor, and in 1993, assistant managing editor for business news. He began writing his column in 1998 and continued even during a three-year stint as executive editor of the International Herald Tribune in Paris. Earlier in his career, Ignatius was a reporter for The Wall Street Journal, covering at various times the steel industry, the Justice Department, the CIA, the Senate, the Middle East and the State Department.
His long term relationships with people in the Justice Department and the CIA made him the perfect tool for the release of government information about communications between former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and the Ambassador of Russia. Those relationships are being reviewed carefully scrutinized.
Flynn is NOT the Target
A source in the government who demanded confidentiality as a condition of speaking with SuperStation95, says former National Security Adviser Flynn is NOT the target; whoever leaked information to the Washington Post about Flynn's phone calls with the Russian Ambassador is the real target. Here is the timeline for which the Investigation is proceeding:
November 8, 2016: Donald Trump is elected the 45th president of the United States. Flynn, a former Army general who was an early and ardent supporter of the Republican nominee, is expected to get a senior position in the Trump White House.
November 18: Trump names Flynn as his national-security adviser.
December 29: President Obama announced measures, including sanctions, on Russia for its interference in the U.S. election. The sanctions are in addition to those imposed on Moscow following its invasion in 2014 of Ukraine’s Crimea region. Flynn and Kislyak speak that day, The Washington Post reports, citing a Trump transition official. The official says sanctions weren’t discussed. Additionally, CNN reports the Russian ambassador texted Flynn on December 28.
December 30: Russian President Vladimir Putin says Moscow will not retaliate. The Post says that prompted U.S. intelligence analysts to look for reasons why Putin declined to impose his own measures against the U.S. They found, the newspaper reported, Kislyak’s communications, including the phone call, with Flynn. Sally Yates, then the deputy attorney general, found Flynn’s comments in the call “highly significant,” the Post reported.
January 12: David Ignatius, the Post columnist, wrote that Flynn and Kislyak spoke several times on December 29, the day the sanctions were announced. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions?” Ignatius wrote. He added a Trump transition official told him the calls, which occurred before the U.S. sanctions were announced, did not cover that topic. Ignatius added:
This official later added that Flynn’s initial call was to express condolences to Kislyak after the terrorist killing of the Russian ambassador to Ankara Dec. 19, and that Flynn made a second call Dec. 28 to express condolences for the shoot-down of a Russian plane carrying a choir to Syria. In that second call, Flynn also discussed plans for a Trump-Putin conversation sometime after the inauguration. In addition, a second Trump official said the Dec. 28 call included an invitation from Kislyak for a Trump administration official to visit Kazakhstan for a conference in late January.
January 13: Sean Spicer, the White House spokesman, told reporters in a conference call that Flynn and Kislyak only discussed a post-inauguration call between Trump and Putin. “That was it, plain and simple,” he said.
January 15: Pence, on CBS’s Face the Nation, said Flynn “did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia.”
January 19: Yates, the deputy attorney general, and senior intelligence officials debated what to do with the information they had on Flynn. The Post reported that FBI Director James Comey argued against notifying Trump administration officials of the communications.
January 20: Trump was inaugurated; Flynn officially became national-security adviser.
January 23: Spicer told reporters he spoke with Flynn about the issue the previous night (January 22). He said Flynn and the Russian envoy spoke once. They discussed, he said, the Russian plane crash, the Syrian civil war, Christmas, and a call between their two leaders. Yates raised the issue again with Comey, who the Post said dropped his initial opposition to briefing the administration.
January 26: Yates briefed Donald McGahn, the White House counsel, about the conversation, Spicer said Tuesday. (The FBI interviewed Flynn immediately prior to this briefing, the Times reported Tuesday, but it’s unclear what date that interview occurred. The Times added the bureau believes Flynn wasn’t completely forthcoming during the interview.) The Post reported earlier Tuesday that Yates told McGahn that Flynn had misled Pence and others about the content of his conversations with Kislyak. Flynn, Yates reportedly said, was consequently vulnerable to Russian blackmail. Spicer said McGahn immediately briefed Trump and other senior officials. Trump ordered McGahn to look into whether there was a legal issue, Spicer said. After several days, Spicer said, McGahn concluded there was none. Spicer said the nature of the conversation between Flynn and the Russian envoy was not unusual, but “the president [then] evaluated the trust issue” and concluded there had been an erosion of trust. Explaining the time difference between the time Trump was briefed and the time Flynn resigned, Spicer said he didn’t understand how that was “due process.” Yates, he said, “didn’t come in and say there was an issue. She said, ‘Wanted to give you a heads-up there may be information.’ She could not confirm there was an investigation.”
February 7 and 8: Flynn told the Post he did not discuss the sanctions with Kislyak. A day later, his spokesman told the Post the national security adviser “couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.”
February 9: NBC News reported Tuesday Pence was only informed of the Justice Department’s warning about Flynn 15 days after Trump and others were told.
February 10: An unnamed Trump administration official told the Post Pence either misspoke or was misled by Flynn. Further, The New York Times reported that transcripts existed of the conversation. While the alleged content of the conversations was a likely breach of protocol during a presidential transition—and could be a breach of the law—it’s unlikely to lead to any charges against Flynn.
February 11 and 12: When asked about it en route to Mar-a-Lago, Trump replied he was unaware of the controversy. Spicer said Trump was referring only to the Post’s article on the conversation. Here’s the exchange that took place:
Still, Flynn went to Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida retreat, with the president and the Japanese prime minister. He appeared to enjoy Trump’s confidence, and even huddled with the president when news broke of North Korea’s missile launch. Still, there was no public word from Trump over the reports about his national-security adviser.
February 14: Conway said it was Flynn’s decision to resign; Spicer said Trump asked for Flynn’s resignation.
At issue is who leaked information as to the existence of the Flynn conversations and who leaked a transcript of those conversations?
The leaking of the information about the existence of conversations between Flynn and the Russian Ambassador compromised ongoing intelligence activities and was criminal. The leaking of a transcript of those conversations was also criminal.
It is believed that more than one federal agency is involved in the two leaks; i.e. perhaps the NSA, perhaps the CIA and perhaps the Dept. of Justice (DOJ).
"Whoever did this is going down. They're going to lose their job, their pension and then, their freedom."
the source told SuperStation95.
Trump Transition Team also under scrutiny
In addition to the phone, cellular and email records mentioned above from the timeline shown, additional records are being reviewed for staffers on the Trump Transition Team operating at Trump Tower in New York City. It is feared that a Trump Transition Team member may be involved in the leaked information and if so, he/she/they will be purged from the Trump Administration and prosecuted.
This is a huge investigation and those involved in the leak(s) are in very big trouble.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) said Tuesday that those who leaked the contents of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s phone calls “belong in jail.” “That’s nine leakers that all belong in jail,” Nunes said. “Those nine people broke the law, clearly, by leaking classified information to anybody.”
Flynn resigned late Monday night, after a Washington Post report on Feb. 9 said he had privately discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with a Russian ambassador during phone calls in December — despite assertions by Trump officials, including the vice president, that he had never done so.
The Post’s report cited nine anonymous current and former officials “who were in senior positions at multiple agencies” who “had access to reports from U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies that routinely monitor the communications of Russian diplomats.”
“All of those officials said Flynn’s references to the election-related sanctions were explicit,” the report said.
Nunes said he also wanted to know how U.S. intelligence agencies were wiretapping Flynn’s calls, which he said may also have been illegal if there was no Wiretap Warrant.