Showing posts with label 53 Transcripts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 53 Transcripts. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 10, 2023

Right Move

New House Speaker McCarthy announced that Adam Schiff would not be allowed a spot on the House Intelligence Committee which he chaired in the last two sessions of Congress.  The right move.  

In June 2017 the Committee began hearings on Russian interference in the 2016 election, which continued until March 2018.  Though Representative Schiff was only the ranking minority member of the committee at the time, he effectively ran the hearings, as gutless wonder Paul Ryan had given into a bogus Democratic complaint regarding Chairman Devin Nunes which removed him from the hearing. Transcripts were submitted to the Director of National Intelligence for review before being released to the public because officials such as Susan Rice and Samantha Power were among those testifying.  The transcripts were cleared for release at the beginning of 2019 but by that time the Democrats had taken control of Congress and Schiff refused to release them until, finally, DNI Grenell threatened to do so on his own initiative, leading to their release in May 2020.

So, for nearly three years, Schiff was able to leave the hearings and make pronouncements about the dire, indeed criminal activities unearthed in the testimony (the committee also had access to witness emails and telephone records).  He provided a series of juicy stories to his accomplices in the media, all of whom promoted the Trump collusion narrative.  The problem was that everything Schiff said was a lie including, to quote Mary McCarthy's take on Lillian Hellman, "even 'and' and 'the'.

How do I know this?  Once the 5,977 pages of transcripts were released I read them all, unlike the media stenographers reporting Schiff's every word.  It's all there, Alfa Bank, Deutsche Bank, Trump in Moscow, the Trump Tower meeting in NYC, the Ukraine platform at the GOP convention, etc, and there was nothing there.  Schiff knew it all along, and just lied, knowing well his audience and knowing he would never be held accountable.   I wrote up my conclusions in the 53 Transcripts series.

Adam Schiff, along with Hillary Clinton, the Intelligence Community, the New York Times, and the Washington Post could not have done more damage to this country and trust in its institutions if they had been paid agents of the Kremlin.  The same goes for Donald Trump based on his actions since the November 2020 election.

Monday, March 29, 2021

53 Transcripts: Real Estate Promoters

In May and June of last year I wrote a series of posts (53 Transcripts) after reading the nearly 6,000 pages of testimony given to the House Intelligence Committee in 2017 and early 2018 regarding alleged Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election.  This testimony had been suppressed for nearly a year and a half by Representative Adam Schiff after the Democrats seized control of the House because it debunked their theories of Trump collusion with the Russians and exposed Rep Schiff as a serial liar.  I recently discovered one last post that mistakenly was left in draft form and wanted to post it to complete the series.

Before doing so a couple of summary comments on what has proven to be the Russian Collusion Hoax and the greatest political scandal in American history; a concerted attempt to remove an elected President by the opposition party, entrenched federal bureaucrats and supported by supposedly non-partisan media.  The post Election Tampering sums up my views and you can read all the Russia Collusion posts here.

I initially thought there might be something to the allegations regarding Trump based on his own statements during the campaign and after the election.  I was wrong.(1)

There were two pillars upon which the investigation rested.  The first was the Steele Dossier, which proved to be a creation of the Clinton campaign and Russian intelligence, a fact so embarrassing to the Mueller investigation that all mention of the dossier was excised from the collusion section of its final report.  The second was the March 2016 conversation between Professor Joseph Mifsud and junior Trump foreign policy wannabe George Papadopolous.  What was said remains in dispute.  Mifsud, interviewed by the FBI in February 2017, denied making any statements regarding Russian possession of damaging information regarding Hillary Clinton and the Mueller team never charged Mifsud with making a false statement.  What appears to be the case as of now is that Mifsud was not a Russian intelligence asset and not working for the FBI.  But what was he?  If, as I suspect he was tasked by a friendly foreign intelligence service to approach Papadopolous it puts an entirely different light on the beginnings of this affair.  I hope that Special Counsel John Durham's investigation will reveal whatever the truth is about Mifsud.  For more background on Mifsud see Footnote 2 of this post.

Looking back it is also revealing the depths to which the Democrats and their allies stooped to conspiracy mongering.  Just as we have QAnon, we also have what some have aptly referred to as BlueAnon, and the Russian Collusion Hoax was the starting point for an unending wave of conspiracy theories from the Left.

Russian Collusion was a conspiracy theory and it had many sub-components.  As a reminder here are some of them (ones I wrote about as part of the 53 Transcript series are in bold):

Carter Page as key link in collusion

Trump Tower Meeting

Trump Tower Moscow

Miss Universe Moscow and the "salacious allegations" (Fake news, but relevant because Russians.)

Russian Financiers of Trump Org (except there weren't any, but relevant because Russians)

Russian Condo Buyers (after Trump Tower was built, which contains condos separate from the office space, some of the original condo purchasers resold their unit to Russian buyers.  The Trump Organization was not involved but somehow this was relevant because Russians.)

Russian Buying Florida Mansion (Trump bought a Florida mansion and sold it a few years later to a Russian and made tens of millions.  Relevant because Russians.)

Deutsche Bank (so stupid even the D's on the Intelligence Committee gave up on this one.)

Alfa Bank  (Russian owned bank with its servers allegedly connected directly with Trump Org.  Fake news, but relevant because Russians)

Ukraine Plank on GOP Platform

Paul Manafort.  (Supposed co-mastermind behind it all.  Not.  Targeted by Ukrainians working with Hillary Campaign in 2016).

Michael Flynn & The Ruskies (this one completely fell apart with revelations later in 2020)

The Hacks (DNC, DCCC, John Podesta)

Wikileaks (Bumbling clowns Roger Stone and Jerome Corsi try to get info from Assange but fail).

Michael Cohen in Prague.  (And, according to Steele Dossier, co-mastermind with Manafort of collusion.  I was surprised and impressed with Cohen's testimony - precise, knows the real estate world, impassioned rebuttal of the Steele Dossier, and refused to be pushed around by Schiff and Swalwell.)

Cambridge Analytica.  (Bad because it used data from Facebook, unlike the Obama people in 2012 who were good because they used data from Facebook.  More recent information indicates this was a phony story from the start).

This doesn't even include the continuing barrage of "fake news" stories from major media outlets.  For three examples just from one week in December 2017 read Footnote 4 from this post.

Real Estate Promoters

The Democrats on the Intelligence Committee were fixated on the attempt to build a Trump Tower in Moscow based on a complete misunderstanding of how the Trump Organization operated and developed and financed its projects.

There were two primary witnesses on this subject, Felix Sater and long-time Trump Organization lawyer Michael Cohen.

By the time he testified Felix Sater was being portrayed in the press as a Russian asset who was loyal to Putin.  He gave a lengthy opening statement refuting these allegations.  Sater, who was a U.S. citizen after emigrating from Russia with his family at the age of seven, started:

"I was born in 1966 in Moscow, Soviet Union, with the word 'Jew" stamped on my passport under nationality, not Russian, as has been reported about me". 

Sater had previously been the promoter for the Trump SoHo project in Manhattan and had known Michael Cohen since they were both teens.  In discussing some of his emails and his claims regarding contacts with the Russian government as he pursued the Trump Tower project he was unabashed about the fact he would say anything to get a deal done.
"Guys, I'm a real estate promoter.  Until the bank writes the check, it's all salesmanship and promotion to try to get many, many parties towards the center to try to get the deal done." 

Reading this in light of the Trump presidency and, in particular, the debacle he created between the 2020 election and the inauguration, it is clear how much of Trump's political strategy derived from his real estate experience.  The Trump projects were transactional and one-time events.  Each stood alone.  Trump never had to think about longer-term strategy and it hampered him as President.  After the election he employed his real estate techniques, making outlandish and insupportable statements about election fraud, specifically the Dominion software allegations.  He simply didn't care if they were true or not as long as he got enough of his supporters to believe they were.  He would say anything, regardless of longer-term consequences, if it could get him the deal.

Sater was an independent contractor.  If he could put together the deal and the parties in an acceptable form the Trump Organization could agree to proceed with his proposal.  There was never any need for he or anyone else to talk with the Trump Org or banks about financing because the Trump Org only did licensing deals, it provided its brand name and management skills if a project proceeded, that was it - there was no need for financing, so all the talk about being dependent on Russian banks for financing was fake news.
 
It was Sater and Michael Cohen working on the Trump Tower Moscow project and it was only if it came together that it would go to Trump for approval.  Cohen confirmed the contingent nature of Sater's efforts, telling the committee that in a real estate deal, "the loyalty is to who brings the check first."  
 
Sater stated he was ambivalent about Trump entering the presidential campaign because its potential effect on the deal was uncertain:
"I had a concern both that if we won and the project couldn't move forward, because maybe he couldn't do it as the President . . . or if he lost and the other side would lose interest in financing it".  
Cohen testified he discounted some of Sater's email claims and never discussed them with Trump.
"What Mr Sater is is a salesman, and he uses very colorful language".
Cohen went on to say the deal failed because partner could never establish control of property and "I had lost confidence in the licensee [Sater]" by January 2016. 
 
In general, Cohen's testimony demonstrated the complete lack of business knowledge by the Democrats on the committee.
 
He also testified the only time Donald Trump spoke with him regarding Putin was to ask, "Did you see that President Putin said some really nice things about me?", underscoring Trump's lack of interest in the details of foreign policy as well as his belief that if you say nice things about him he will say nice things about you.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) In this, as in other instances, Trump was his own worst enemy.  His statements about Putin and Russia during the campaign and during his Presidency were often terrible and frequently embarrassing.  I wrote that at his 2018 Helsinki summit with Putin, the president sounded like a starstruck teenage girl.  This contrasted with his actions, including sanctioning additional Russian oligarchs, authorizing the attack that killed 200 Russian mercenaries in Syria, the unprecedented American-Swedish-Finnish military exercises in the Baltic aimed at Russia, sanctions halting the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, and an energy policy damaging to the Russian economy.

It's the exact opposite of the Biden Administration so far.  Biden talks very tough about Russia and Putin but, so far, he's given Putin everything he wants.  Trump had refused to extend the Intermediate Nuclear Missile Treaty with Russia unless Russia improved compliance and unless China, which is now a bigger threat, became a party.  For Putin this was a problem because if the treaty was not extended it would place enormous economic pressure on Russia.  Biden immediately announced a five year extension with no additional conditions and without China joining.  Biden has also effectively withdrawn sanctions on Nordstream 2 and with his domestic energy policy he is driving a reduction in U.S. output and an increase in oil prices which suits Putin just fine.  Little noticed in the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian election interference was a mention in the appendix that the undisputed conclusion was that the Kremlin was supporting American environmental groups trying to block fracking and energy production because it would create favorable conditions for the sale of Russian fossil fuels.
 

Friday, June 12, 2020

53 Transcripts: The Trump Tower Meeting

The Trump Tower meeting took place on June 9, 2016 but did not come to public attention until a report by the New York Times on July 8, 2017, a report that added a lot more fuel to the Russia collusion fire, abetted by the clumsy handling of the news by the Trumps, father and son.

Donald Trump Jr's agreeing to that meeting was the height of stupidity and recklessness.  The way to handle a sensitive offer of dirt regarding your opponent is to use cut-outs as the Clinton campaign did when it used FusionGPS, a firm working for a Putin-associated oligarch, to obtain information from Russian intelligence sources damaging to Donald Trump.

There were eight participants in the meeting, of whom six were interviewed by the House Intelligence Committee.  In addition, everyone associated with the Trump campaign who testified was asked about the Trump Tower meeting (it turned out none of them were aware at the time it had occurred).  It was also fascinating to see how many of the Russian participants had direct or indirect connections with Hillary Clinton or the Obama administration.

The participants (those interviewed in boldface):

Donald Trump Jr
Jared Kushner
Paul Manafort
Natalia Veselnitskaya (Russian lawyer and lobbyist, and hereafter referred to as V)
Ike Kaveladze (US based VP for real estate development company run by Russian Aras Agalarov)
Rinat Akhmetshin (Russian-American lobbyist)
Anatoli Samachornov (interpreter)
Rob Goldstone (music promoter, manager of Russian pop star Emin Agalarov, son of Aras)

My assessment is the basic story as laid out by the six witnesses is generally accurate because (1) the testimony is consistent though not so identical in the details as to raise suspicions, (2) Anatoli Samachornov is very credible (for reasons explained below), and (3) if the slightest discrepancy (real or imagined) had been found in anyone's testimony by the Mueller gang they would have been indicted for false statements as we saw with Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, and George Papadopolous.  My takeaway - the meeting was a clown show from start to finish.

The origins of the meeting are in an early June 2016 phone call from Emin Agalarov to his manager Rob Goldstone, a dual US/UK citizen who Donald Trump Jr described in his testimony as a "flamboyant music promoter" (p.27).  He'd met Donald Sr in 2013 and been involved with negotiations for the Trump-sponsored Miss Universe Moscow later that year.  Goldstone met Donald Jr the following year when he had a client appearing on Celebrity Apprentice (this is all so weird).

Not long before Agalarov called, Rob had worked with him on a music video featuring a song with visuals celebrating Hillary Clinton's success in beating Sanders and becoming the Democratic nominee.  Unfortunately, the blowback from Emin's Russian fans was so bad they had to remove the video from social media.  This time Emin was calling to convey a request from his father, a billionaire Russian real estate developer who built the largest indoor shopping center in Moscow as well as the Trade Expo, hosted the Trump owned Miss Universe 2013 Contest in Moscow, received the Russian Order of Honor from Putin the same year, and is a partner with Robert DeNiro in two Moscow restaurants, to arrange a meeting between V and the Trumps.  In 2017, Agaralov joined the list of sanctioned Russian oligarchs under a Congressional act signed into law by President Trump.  Goldstone summarized the information:

I wonder if you could contact the Trumps.  My father just had a meeting with a Russian attorney in his office, who has some potentially damaging information about Russian funding to the Democrats and Hillary. (p.33)
Based on his testimony and a little research on Goldstone, this is a guy who knows nothing about politics (and cares less) but will do anything to promote his client and since the client asked him to arrange a meeting he was now on a mission. Think of the Matthew McConaughey agent character in Tropic Thunder willing to go to any length to get his client his Tivo, even if it means a dangerous trip into the jungle, and you've captured the essence of Goldstone.

Goldstone told the committee he had only one shot at getting the attention of Don Jr so sent him an email promising "some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary" (p.37), describing it as "a schmooze tactic" and was very pleased when he got back a response indicating interest and willingness to meet (p.41) so there is no doubt Don Jr agreed to the meeting because of the promise of damaging information regarding Hillary.  Goldstone never met V until he met her and the others in the Trump Tower lobby to take them to the meeting.

Trey Gowdy asked how he could reconcile his putting together a video celebrating Hillary Clinton with the email promising incriminating information on the same person.  Goldstone's response:
I'm not in the slightest bit political . . . my job is to promote Emin the best way I could.  And if I had been able to convince the DNC to use this song, it would have been amazing for him.  And if ultimately my sole client asked me to send an email that's important to him and/or his father . . . well, again, I'll do that. (p.47)

V was a Russian lawyer who spoke no English.  She was a litigator (the question of whether, or to what extent, she was connected to the Russian government remains unclear) who'd been working for Denis Katys, owner of Prevezon Holdings on litigation regarding the U.S. government's actions in seizing his properties, on investigating Bill Browder, proponent of the Magnitsky Act, and to lobby to overturn or modify the Act. The Magnitsky Act is named after a Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian accountant who worked for Bill Browder on his Russian business.  Magnitsky was arrested and allegedly beaten to death in a Russian prison, prompting the U.S. Congress to pass the Act which included sanctions on a number of Kremlin-linked oligarchs, including Katys, who also hired FusionGPS to lobby against the Act.  As a result, V and Glenn Simpson worked closely together.  In fact, V and Simpson had lunch together the day before the Trump Tower meeting and met again the day following the meeting.

Samachornov described V as a one issue person who was driven to meet any person who might help her client.  My guess is that Agaralov's call to Goldstone was prompted by Katys contacting him.  Ironically, the sequence undermines a theory the Democrats on the committee tried to promote, that Agaralov was closely linked to the Trumps.  If that had been true, why would he have needed to go through Rob Goldstone to set up the meeting?

Ike Kaveladze came to the U.S. in 1991 and is a dual U.S./Russia citizen, working for Agalarov who asked him to attend the meeting to translate for Veselnitskaya who spoke no English.  Prior to the meeting, V told him it was to be primarily about the Magnitsky Act but also mentioned she had some information damaging to the Clinton campaign.  It was only when he met Veselnitskaya for lunch before going over to Trump Tower for the meeting that he found out she had hired Samochornov to interpret so although he accompanied V to the meeting he felt pretty useless.

Anatoli Samochornov is considered the best Russian-English interpreter in the New York area, coming to the U.S. in 1991 and is a U.S. (not dual) citizen.  Working as a contract interpreter for the State Department since 1997 he has, among other assignments, interpreted at President Obama's UN summit on refugees.  He was hired in October 2015 as an interpreter by a Foundation funded by Denis Katys, who had also retained V, Akhmetshin, and Glenn Simpson.  His initial meeting with them was at the New York offices of the international law firm of Baker & Hostetler regarding Prevezon's ongoing litigation.  Samochornov has no record of contact with any Russian government officials.  Having spent time with V over the prior months he was asked about her views of U.S. politics and replied, "I would not characterize her as partisan towards U.S. politics in one particular way or another", and had never heard her speak about the Trump family until a few days before the meeting when she asked him to attend and interpret.  He also testified he had no idea what the meeting was about until he was in it.  Of all the participants in the meeting Samochornov comes across as the most grounded, sophisticated, and direct in his testimony.  In fact, we recently learned that four days after the story broke in 2017 he was interviewed by the Mueller gang and when he confirmed Donald Jr's story they lost all further interest in the matter.

The last member of the crew was Rinat Akhmetshin, another U.S./Russia dual citizen who arrived in the early 1990s.  He's actively worked as a lobbyist, primarily for the former Soviet republics of Central Asia and, at the time, was also working with a Russian foundation aiming to restart Russian adoptions by Americans, a foundation funded by Denis Katys of Prevezon, which Putin had terminated in retaliation for passage of the Magnitsky Act.  Rinat was very blunt with the committee, testifying that while he has done no work for Putin or his associates, he will not work for any Russian directly opposing the regime because it is too dangerous (press reports often claim Akhmetshin was part of Russian intelligence, but he explained his only link was military service in the late 1980s as a guard at intelligence facilities and no information contradicting him has surfaced).  He testified the FBI routinely debriefed him after meetings with Russian officials.  Akhmetshin had met V in the course of his work for the foundation.

After learning he was in New York to see a show that evening, V invited Akhmetshin to lunch which is when he learned about the Trump Tower meeting which V invited him to join. (1)  Rinat was unprepared, telling the committee he was wearing a t-shirt and jeans but ended up accompanying them anyway.  Akhmetshin saw the briefing paper V had prepared for the meeting and realized that while it contained a brief reference to the Ziff Brothers hedge fund issue it was primarily about the Magnitsky Act and didn't realize there was any connection with Clinton.  Samachornov described the conversation at lunch as "the Magnitsky law, Mr. Browder, the Prevezon case", and told the committee the subject of U.S. politics, the election, and the Trumps never came up.

Since Goldstone was the only one who'd been to Trump Tower he walked them over to the building, checked them through security in the lobby and went up the elevator with the group.  His intent had been to introduce them to Don Jr and then leave but Don Jr asked him to stay.

On the Trump side, Jared testified he was not told anything about "damaging information", wasn't sure what the meeting was about and attended as a courtesy to Donald Jr.

Once introductions were made, V launched into her presentation, the first part of which was a convoluted story about an American hedge fund, operated by the Ziff Brothers, committing tax fraud in US and Russia with the aid of Browder and funneling contributions to the Democratic National Committee. (2) As she went on, Kaveladze testified that "Mr Kushner was very frustrated.  He looked very frustrated" (p.69), finally interrupting and, according to Goldstone, asking, "Could you just come to a point, or is there a point to this?" (p.87).  Akhmetshin testified that Don Jr also quickly lost interest. [ADDED: In his testimony, FusionGPS head Glenn Simpson testified that some of the information presented by V was based on research his firm had done, though he claimed he had no knowledge of the meeting and it was not a set-up of the Trumps.  I trust Simpson as much as I trust Steve Bannon - not at all.]

At that point, Akhmetshin, sensing disaster, jumped in and gave an impromptu talk about the Magnitsky Act and the prohibition on adoptions from Russia, which tested the patience of Trump Jr and Kushner even more (according to all those who testified, throughout the entire meeting Paul Manafort was doing stuff on his cellphone and never paid the least attention, except for one moment (3))  Kushner testified he texted his admin to call and get him out of the meeting and the other participants agreed he left before it ended.  The meeting finally ground to a halt after 20 minutes.   Akhmetshin told the committee, "I thought the whole meeting was ridiculous" (p.147)  Goldstone stated he was embarrassed and apologized to Don Jr as they were leaving.

Don Jr repeatedly stated he had not told his father about the meeting either before or after it happened, nor had he mentioned its purpose to Manafort or Kushner.  He said his reason for not doing so beforehand was he wanted to vet the information promised by Goldstone before informing Trump Sr.  My take is that Don Jr was trying to stake out a bigger role for himself in the campaign and it would have been quite a big deal for him to have more scandalous Clinton information handed to him.  His explanation for why he didn't tell Dad after the meeting, also helps explain his hesitation before:

"I believe I would remember a conversation like that with my father, and I also would not bring my father something that I believe to be a waste of time.  I've learned that through many years of working with him the hard way." (p.126)
Based on what I already knew about Trump before 2016, having observed him since, and read the  testimony of how he operated his business and campaign by those who know him, Don Jr's explanation rings true with me.  The Trump Tower meeting was a disaster; nothing came of it.  Why would he tell his father and look like a fool?

There is also no documentary evidence to the contrary.  I've haven't noted this before but all of those associated with the Trump Org or Campaign also had their records subpoenaed, including emails, by the committee and were questioned intensively by the members.  And this crowd was too naive to know not to put some things in writing.

Under questioning Ike Kaveladze stated he told his wife and 13-year old daughter about the meeting before it occurred, telling them V had some information damaging to Hillary Clinton, which upset his daughter who supported Clinton.  After he left the meeting he called his daughter to tell her nothing damaging to Hillary happened.

I learned from his testimony that Rinat Akhmetshin also had a Hillary Clinton connection.  His business colleague Edward Lieberman, was married to Evelyn Lieberman, White House assistant to Hillary and later Deputy Chief of Staff to Bill Clinton.  It was Evelyn who spotted what was going on with Monica Lewinsky and moved her to an assignment away from any connection with Bill.  She later became Director of Voice of America.  Akhmetshin had been to the Lieberman's home on several occasions and more than once had met Hillary there.  He also referred to Glenn Simpson of FusionGPS as an "old acquaintance". (p.42)

In questioning of Trump campaign witnesses, Schiff and Swalwell pushed hard to establish that Donald Trump's campaign remark on June 7, two days before the Trump Tower meeting, that the following Monday (June 13) he'd have some new big news about Hillary, showed he knew about the planned meeting in advance.  Both Hope Hicks and Steve Bannon testified the reference was to Clinton Cash, a book published in 2015 by Peter Schweizer, documenting the seedy side of the Clinton Foundation, which had been recently made into a documentary.  The plan was for a event showcasing the film and its first U.S. showing.  However, on the night of June 11-12, Omar Mateen killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida and the event was postponed while the campaign focused on the candidate's response to the murders.

The existing record shows V's intent was to use the potentially damaging information about Hillary as a hook to get the meeting which was, in reality, about lobbying for repeal of the Magnitsky Act.  The preparation and coordination for the Russians attending the meeting was very poor, with V having little idea how to effectively make her case.

There are alternative explanations as to how and why the approach to the Trumps was made.

(1) As described by Samachornov, V was monomanical about the case and may have come up with the idea herself and gone to Katys.

(2) Katys and Agaralov may have seen the damaging information on Clinton as a way to curry favor with the Trumps, either if Don Sr unexpectedly was elected or, if he lost, as way to enhance relationships.  If so, it shows how little understanding they had of American politics.

(3) This was part of a deep convoluted Kremlin plot to do something, I'm just not sure what, given the damaging information was a nothingburger.

(4)  Could it have been Glenn Simpson who planted the idea with V of a meeting with the Trumps?  He had worked closely with her and was tied to the same oligarch whose interests he was advancing.  What they didn't know was Simpson had been hired by the Clinton campaign to investigate Trump's Russian connections and had recently hired, or was about to hire, Christopher Steele.  Unlike the Russians, Simpson was sophisticated enough to understand the implications of a direct meeting between them and the Trump campaign.  Weighing against this theory is it would have been in Simpson's interests to make the meeting public before the election.

In any event, there is no evidence the damaging information was anything beyond the Ziff Brothers (4) allegation and none of the participants had any followup with anyone associated with the Trump campaign.

We'll leave the last word on this debacle to Corey Lewandowski who testified he spoke with President Trump shortly after news of the meeting became public in 2017.  Lewandowski said he told the President, "I thought it was a politically stupid thing to do to have that meeting."  The President responded, according to Lewandowski:
"He acknowledged it was a short, stupid meeting too and probably shouldn't have taken place". (p.87)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 (1) Samachornov tells a different version of how Akmetshin ended up in the meeting.  According to his account, once the meeting with Don Jr was set, V asked him to send a text to Rob Goldstone asking him to pass on her request to Don Jr to:
". . . include our trusted associate and lobbyist, Mr Rinat Akmetshin, who is working to advance these issues with several congressmen." (p.24)
Goldstone texted back:
"I would suggest you bring whoever you need in order to make the meeting successful." (p.28)
The evidence of all those involved would indicate Goldstone never passed on the request to formally add Akmentshin or, for that matter, Kaveladze, to the meeting and it was only Goldstone's presence as someone known to Trump Tower security that got them all up where the Trump crowd seemed surprised at the number of visitors.

Whether Akmetshin really knew in advance about the meeting in part depends on whether his testimony that he showed up at the lunch in t-shirt and jeans is true.  Both sides in this meeting seem to have been rather casual in the lead up to the event.

(2) Samachornov's summary of V's presentation:
". . . she spoke that during the course of her research into the Prevezon case she uncovered financial irregularities by Mr. Browder and also by his client, the Ziff Brothers, who were contributors - and here again, I don't remember - either to the DNC or to Mrs. Clinton's campaign." (p.48) 
(3)  According to Samachornov, when V mentioned contributions from the Ziff Brothers, Manafort looked up from his phone and:
". . . he said something along the lines that the fact that there is a political contribution is not significant, that people contribute to both parties all the time." (p.49)
(4)  Daniel, Dirk and Robert Ziff are the sons of William Ziff a prominent magazine publisher.  They started Ziff Brothers Investments in 1994.  Two of them live in Manhattan and the other in Palm Beach.  My guess is Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump know them.


Saturday, June 6, 2020

53 Transcripts: The Hacks

Unlike my other summaries of the 53 transcripts recently released by the House Intelligence Committee, there is a lot about this subject I simply don't know enough about to have an informed opinion, other than sticking for now to my default view that the hacks were Russian linked and that the Trump campaign had nothing to do with them. 

The 2016 election campaign hack story can be confusing because there were three different hacks and releases by Wikileaks and a fourth possible hack, which would have occurred earlier, and provides essential context.

The Hacks

John Podesta (Chairman of Clinton campaign) - March 2016 with Wikileaks release on October 7, 2016.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) - April 2016 with Wikileaks release in late August.

Democratic National Committee (DNC) - April 2016 with Wikileaks release beginning on July 22, 2016.

The fourth possible hack is of the Hillary Clinton emails from her time as Secretary of State (2009-13) when she maintained a private server which did not meet government security standards.  These include 33,000 emails she had destroyed in an effort to obstruct justice.  It is possible that foreign powers, including Russia and/or China, may be obtained these emails.  The missing emails and the possibility of a foreign unfriendly power having them was being publicly discussed well before public knowledge of the three hacks described above.

Interviews

Those interviewed by the committee with knowledge relevant to the hacks:

John Podesta
Andrew Brown (Technology Director, DNC)
Marc Elias (Perkins Coie, counsel for DNC and Clinton Campaign)
Michael Sussman (Perkins Coie)
Shawn Henry (Crowdstrike)
Yared Tamed (IT Contractor, DNC)

Podesta and Brown had nothing of value to say.  Podesta's hack was very simple.  He clicked on a link in an email sent to him which allowed someone access to his emails.  The summary below will focus on the DNC hack along with some discussion of the DCCC hack.

The Testimony

Yared Tamed worked as a fulltime IT contractor for the DNC since 2013, reporting to Andrew Brown.  In September 2015 she was notified by the FBI that its cybersecurity unit had identified a possible penetration of the DNC servers by a foreign entity.  She and her team looked but could not find anything.  Tamed continued periodically speaking but the "Information FBI was providing honestly was frustrating in how redacted it was". (p.15)

In April 2016, the FBI requested logs (metadata from email which was sent on the 29th), but the day before her team found unusual activity on the network leading them to a hacker.  They subsequently found a second hacker using tools provided by CrowdStrike once it was brought into the matter.

Tamed testified she provided requested images to CrowdStrike which provided them to the FBI.

Marc Elias of Perkin Coie became aware of the DNC hack in April 2016 and reached out to his firm's cybersecurity law expert, Michael Sussman, a former DOJ lawyer.  Sussman hired Crowdstrike, with whom he had not worked before, on the recommendation of others at the firm, but testified the FBI told him it was Russian hackers even before CrowdStrike was hired.

Although James Comey testified the FBI was denied access to the servers, Sussman testified he told the FBI they could have access to anything they wanted, including the servers, but they never asked for access.

Shawn Henry, President of CrowdStrike, joined the company after retiring from the FBI in 2012.  According to Henry what they saw after being hired "was consistent with what we'd seen previously and associated with Russian Government". (p.25)

Henry explained that the two hackers were (1) Russian intelligence (known as Cozy Bear) and (2) Russian military intelligence (known as Fancy Bear).  Cozy Bear had been monitoring email and communications channels at the DNC since July 2015.  Fancy Bear got into the DCCC opposition research and candidate files in early April 2016 and was able to migrate from there into the DNC servers on April 11 where, later that month, it was discovered by Tamed's team.  According to Henry, CrowdStrike did not "have any reason to believe they actually were coordinating with each other." (p.49)

Regarding the issue of data exfiltration which received some media attention when the transcripts were released, Henry stated:
"We have indicators that data was exfiltrated.  We did not have concrete evidence that data was exfiltrated from the DNC . . . it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don't have the evidence that says it actually left". (p.32)
However, Henry said there was clear evidence data was exfiltrated from the DCCC.

Marc Elias made an intriguing remark about the DCCC hack:
"I would dare say that not even every member of the committee would, if give the - was able to hack either the [DCCC] or [NRCC] would have the level of sophistication to pick out the kinds of records that were picked out and put online.  And certainly, it seemed to me unlikely that a foreign adversary sitting in Moscow did that" (p.57)
He later speculated regarding the leaked swing House district opposition research, that while it was plausible Russians did the hacking they would not have understood the value of the information.

These observations were not followed up during the committee questioning.  My guess is Elias made them to try to give creedence to the idea that the Trump campaign was coordinating with the Russians and providing the expertise to interpret the documents.  I find that absurd, given how little political expertise (and time) the Trump campaign staff had, along with the fact there is not one bit of concrete evidence of such collaboration.

Under questioning Sussman testified to something not directly relevant to the hacks but of interest as to the Russia collusion story.  Prior to the election, Sussman's former colleague at DOJ and then General Counsel of the FBI, Jim Baker, passed on to him information about contacts to Russian entities and the Trump organization which he then passed on to the New York Times, Washington Post, and Slate.

All of those associated with the Trump campaign who testified denied any involvement with or knowledge of any of the hacks.  They thought it was a bad joke when the accusations were made and dismissed Trump's remarks during the campaign about Hillary's emails as the candidate's typical riffing off the cuff. 

During his testimony Steve Bannon was asked if there had been any discussions about the hacking.  He said it only came up in the debate prep, when the discussion was how, if the question was asked, to pivot to the topic of Clinton corruption which Trump was hammering away on.

Tuesday, June 2, 2020

53 Transcripts: Papadopolous and Page: How'd That Happen?

In March 2016, Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski had a problem.  As Trump moved to the front of the GOP pack, the press was starting to take the candidate more seriously, asking questions about who was advising him on foreign policy, implying (well, maybe more than implying) he lacked the gravitas and substance needed to be President.

As with any policy matter in the campaign, foreign policy was whatever Donald Trump said in the moment but Lewandowski wasn't about to say that, knowing what the press reaction would be.   He needed to have a group of national security advisors so the media would stop saying they didn't have one.  And he was getting pressure from Jared Kushner to fix it fast.

According to their testimony, no one associated with the Trump campaign had a detailed policy discussion with the candidate on any subject, let alone Russia.  The Trump you saw on the campaign trail was the private Trump, talking in generalities and not interested in details.

To the extent anyone recalled discussions about Russia it was at the level of wanting Russia's cooperation against ISIS or Steve Bannon's characterization of Trump's view (which he also attributed to Michael Flynn) that "they're an enemy, but somebody that you may be able to work with over time, and you certainly don't want more enemies in the world" (p.34).  Discussions were more at the level of what Michael Cohen recounted as his one conversation with Trump about Russia which consisted of him saying, "Did you see that President Putin said some really nice things about me?" (p.140).

Lewandowski decided he needed to "check the box" and move on, so on March 12, 2016 he called Sam Clovis, senior policy advisor and a campaign co-chair.  Clovis was an ex-fighter pilot, former Inspector General for NORAD, later a talk show host in Iowa who lost the 2014 primary for the Republican Senate nomination to Jodi Ernst.  Sam was initially a Rick Perry supporter, who joined the Trump campaign after Perry dropped out.

Clovis described himself to the committee as a "Classic Cold War warrior" who favored containing Russia and supported Trump because he was a "trade hawk". (p.15).  He also dismissed Trump's favorable comments regarding Putin:
". . . I think he was having a lot of fun with the Putin thing" and liked to "play up [the bromance] . . . I just think he really liked poking the media". (p.16)
When asked about Trump's foreign policy views, Sam's response was like the others, "I don't think he ever expressed to me definitively what he thought about foreign policy on any level" (p.17), and reinforced what the committee had been hearing from others about thin campaign staffing, "Policy shop was one-deep and it was me." (p.18)

Lewandowski tasked Clovis with putting together a National Security advisory board which would have a short public session with media present and then a one-hour meeting with the President.  Other than that it would have no further duties or meetings.  Before coming back to what Clovis did next, there are three other Trump associates involved with the advisory board.

Jeff Sessions was the first senator to endorse Donald Trump and he was asked to chair the board.  To the committee, Sessions described his foreign policy views as transitioning in recent years from Wilsonian to realist.  His view of the board:
"The committee was not any serious - a group of people authorized to speak for President Trump, and they absolutely weren't authorized to go around the world pretending to represent him". (p.26)
Navy veteran Jeff (JD) Gordon served as Pentagon spokesperson for Secretaries Rumsfeld and Gates.  Gordon testified he believed Russia was a threat, though it was okay to try to deal with the country, but:
"I think the Obama administration tried to have better relations but for getting nothing in return at all." (52)
He was Director of the board and confirmed it was a one-time event.

Rick Dearbon had worked for Senator Sessions since 1996, was his chief of staff, and, as a part-time job, ran the DC policy office for the Trump campaign. (1)

Sessions, Gordon, and Dearborn had never heard of Papadopoulos (I'm just going to call him Papa from here on because I'm tired of typing his full name) and Page before they were recommended by Sam Clovis.  And how did Clovis come across them?

Carter Page came to Clovis' attention through Ed Cox, chair of the New York Republican Party and son-in-law of Richard Nixon.  Page was a 1993 graduate of the Naval Academy (top 10% in his class) and served five years on active duty.  After leaving the service he did a Fellowship at the Council on Foreign Relations, got an MBA from NYU, joined Merrill Lynch as an investment banker and was a VP in that firm's Moscow office.  He'd left Merrill in 2009 to co-found Global Energy Capital, a little known energy investment firm.  Along the way he'd gotten to know Cox who introduced him to Lewandowski, and Clovis met him while visiting Trump Tower in early 2016. (2)

If Page's credentials were thin and definitely not a heavy hitter in the national security arena, those of the 28-year old Papa were virtually nonexistent.  He'd been working on Ben Carson's campaign, and cold-called Lewandowski who passed him on to Clovis.  Papa had a Masters in Security Studies from University College London and worked as an unpaid intern at the Hudson Institute from 2011 to 2015.  In 2015 he'd joined Energy Stream, a small London-based (where Papa was living) energy consultancy.

Lewandowski told Clovis they needed to stop getting beat up by the media and NeverTrumpers and "alleviate some of the press pressure". (p.39) but the problem facing Clovis was that most of the GOP foreign policy establishment wanted nothing to do with Donald Trump.  Sam was able to assemble a few people with some experience for the board, Generals Keith Kellogg, Bert Mizusawa, Garry Harrell, Admiral Chuck Kubic, Walid Phares, Joe Schmitz, telling the committee, "That was about all the people we had on a Rolodex that were supportive of the President that had any cachet at all". (p.40) but felt he needed to add a couple more which is when he reached out to Papa and Page.  Why he needed more was never explained but it reminds me of this scene from Ocean's 11.


He'd only met Papa on the phone but "He was young, didn't have a lot of experience, but at that point we needed people" (p.41), and later in his testimony added, Papa was "a man on the make" "I thought he was in it for himself, and I didn't think he was in it for the candidate"(p.76)  Clovis had a higher opinion of Page though he was "far more . . . favorably disposed to Russia" than himself (p.24), and felt, "he was one of the few people we could find that had a credible enough background that we could put him on that team and would help assauge the press" (p.58), so decided to fill out the board with the two.

Bannon claimed he thought the National Security advisors were weak and told Lewandowski not to do it but he wanted to "check the box and get it out". (p.181)  Whether or not Bannon actually said it (I'm skeptical of anything Bannon says), Lewandowski, by his own admission, paid no attention to the advisors and any substance of foreign policy.  At one point in his testimony he said he'd had a discussion with President Trump just after the Papadopolous indictment and plea was announced and was asked:
"What did you say to the President about George Papadopolous?"
"I said, who the fuck is this guy?" (p.43)
Papa and Page did not impress anybody.  In his polite, mannered way, Jeff Session said:
"Well, I didn't feel like either one had - apparently had a background of significance, that would indicate that they had contributions to make."(p.33)
Rick Dearborn called Papa:"A volunteer that attended one meeting that wanted to travel and had no access to the candidate other than the one meeting"(p.47) and later wrote an email referring to the pair:
"I've met him once.  He has a Carter Page problem.  He goes and meets with folks, expresses his views, and then is tagged by the press as our guy". (p.49) 
Walid Phares, a board member who actually had a reputation and expertise told the committee the other board members wondered why Papa was a member given his lack of experience, and he came to the conclusion that "What he wanted to do is to appear in the campaign as the person who could engage in establishing these relationships". (p.44)  Phares went on to say that while Papa and Page's views on Russia were different from those of the rest of the board:
"At that time, discussing international relations and relations with Russia and China or anybody in the world, was not a taboo.  It was a normal matter." (p.47)
The only meeting of the board took place on March 31 in Washington DC - Carter Page did not attend!  The press was invited in and took photos and then left.  According to Rick Dearborn there was no agenda and no written summary of the meeting.  However, the memory of those attending is consistent.  The meeting last for an hour.  Trump began by asking each member to introduce themselves and make a short statement but Trump and the second board member to introduce himself, Keith Payne, spent 40 minutes talking nuclear weapons and doctrine and national security philosophy, leaving very little time for the others and any other dialogue.  Papa spoke for 90 seconds or two minutes before Sessions shut him down, when Papa raised the possibility of Trump meeting with Putin during the campaign.  It was the only time during the meeting when Sessions intervened which he testified he did because Papa was out of line raising the issue.

Though it was the only time Papa and Page were "active" in the campaign, their actions bedeviled Clovis, Gordon, Dearborn and others throughout and then became the hook upon which the entire Russia collusion hoax was pegged.

Papa was ostensibly the reason the FBI commenced the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, based on his conversation with the mysterious Josef Mifsud (we know what he isn't - Russian asset or FBI informant - but we still don't know what Mifsud is) about damaging Clinton emails supposedly possessed by the Russians, a conversation Papa never told anyone on the Trump campaign about (3), and Page was the target of the FISA warrant, a warrant based on allegations he was the lynchpin of the coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Both Page and Papa kept sending emails trying to push the idea of a Trump-Putin meeting but campaign officials either ignored them or fobbed them off with polite excuses.  As Lewandowski put it when shown one of Page's emails offering such a meeting:
"I wouldn't have needed Carter Page if Donald Trump wanted to see Vladimir Putin". (p.87)
And Clovis said of Papa's proposal for a meeting, "I thought it was a bogus offer" from a self-promoter. (p.88)

As to Papa, Walid Phares impression was "Dr Clovis wanted Papa out of his hair" and and everytime Papa raised a possible Putin meeting "Clovis and JD would say: well it's like dismissive, to we don't need that now". (p.65)

Apart from Papa's conversation with Josef Mifsud (4), the biggest issue was Page's acceptance of an invitation to speak at a conference in Moscow.  According to JD Gordon, Carter Page had "zero" role in formulating campaign policy towards Russia and Ukraine. (p60) and told Page the trip to Russia was a "bad idea" but he went around him and got approval from Lewandowski, as long as it was clear he was there on a personal basis, not representing the campaign.  Once this became public in September, Page was told to disassociate himself from campaign.  Page's Moscow visit allowed the Steele Dossier to paint him as having secret discussions with top Russian officials and Gazprom executives (for which there is no evidence), which was further spun into his alleged role in influencing the Ukraine plank in the GOP platform (something he had nothing to do with).

The association of Papa and Page with the campaign was a disaster both for their lack of substance and for their actions which helped embroil the Trump presidency for three years.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1)  There was a campaign staffer who was linked to Russia in the past.  Michael Caputo, NY State primary director for the campaign and then communications director for caucus operations in the lead up to the convention, did business as a political consultant in that country during the 1990s.   He told the committee he'd never discussed Russia with anyone in the campaign, "There is a good reason for that.  We were running and gunning with our hair on fire". (p. 22)  Like others caught up in the collusion hoax, his job prospects suffered and testified that he'd had to liquidate his childrens' college fund to pay for legal representation.

(2)  Clovis didn't know that Page was an informant for the FBI and had been frequently debriefed by the CIA regarding his contacts with Russians.  The IG Report took the FBI to task for lying to the FISA Court and not informing it of Page's history with the agencies.

(3)  Adam Schiff described the contents of this conversation with so much lurid overstatement that even the FBI's Andrew McCabe pushed back, telling him, "The original Papadopolous information wasn't quite that specific". (p38)  McCabe also made a revealing statement as to why the FISA Warrant was on Page, even though the original information that came to the FBI regarded Papadopolous, "The Papadopolous comment didn't particularly indicate that he was the person that had had - that was interacting with the Russians". (p.13)  This resulted in the peculiar circumstances I noted in a prior post that the FBI Special Agent who handled Steele was informed the dossier was used to corroborate the original information regarding Papadopolous even though the dossier could never be validated, the FBI didn't have enough to get a warrant on Papa, and Papa isn't mentioned in the dossier!

(4)  Mifsud approached Papa immediately after the announcement that he was part of the Trump campaign.

Saturday, May 30, 2020

53 Transcripts: Different Worlds, Part 2

Donald Trump's business dealings, lifestyle, management methods, impulsiveness, and the unique way he ran his campaign baffled the career politicians on the Intelligence Committee (and not just the Democrats).  When I was young, I remember people would talk about how a left-handed boxer could throw his opponents off because they weren't used to punches coming from that angle.  Trump was the political equivalent of a left-handed boxer.  Nothing he did made sense from a traditional campaigning perspective but it threw everyone off.

Trump's entire persona was foreign territory, even for Congressmen used to media and meeting well-known people.  Trump's long-time administrative assistant, Rhona Graff, described it this way:
"My understanding of Mr Trump's life is it's like an encyclopedia-sized version of how many world leaders, athletes, movie stars, TV celebrities, characters around New York City.  I mean, his life is just one celebrity after another". (p.77-78)
What Trump and his campaign pulled off is astonishing.  Whatever else you think of the man it was quite an accomplishment to decide you want to run for president, put together a staff with little national, or even local, campaign experience, use an unprecedented and very unorthodox strategy and succeed in a stunning upset.

The downside was with the lack of political sophistication, barebones staffing, disdain for policy details, and the peculiar character of the candidate, a series of acts occurred which, while random and uncoordinated at the time, gave opponents the ammunition to construct a compelling, though fake, narrative that would hobble the President.

From those on the campaign staff, it was those very characteristics that caused their disbelief that anyone would think they were colluding with the Russians in the midst of the chaos.  You can read it in the testimony - they had their hands full just trying to keep the ship afloat and gave no evidence they had the ability to coordinate an international conspiracy.  To them, the conspiracy story was a joke.  As usual Corey Lewandowski put it bluntly when asked about a conversation with Hope Hicks, in 2017 after the Russian collusion story became big:
"I probably said this was all bullshit". (p.27)
Among the unusual aspects of the Trump campaign was it did no polling or opposition research, both of which are standard practices, though once it became clear Trump would be the nominee the Republican National Committee provided the campaign with its opposition research file on Hillary.

Like communications director Hope Hicks, media director Brad Parscale had no previous campaign experience, being hired because he had done some previous work for the Trump organization.  He testified he used "very simple" Facebook targeting with ads that featured Trump talking.  Questioning Parscale about ads targeting groups (with the expectation a lot occurred which could then be branded as another divisive, racist Trump tactic) the Democrats on the committee were clearly perplexed when he responded that there were, "no ads based on race, religion . . . or immigration status" (p.90) though some were based on whether the recipient were male or female.

All of those around him spoke to the characteristics we saw on the campaign trail and since and were consistent with Trump's way of operating long before that time.

Rhona Graff had some "Public Relations" responsibility for Trump prior to the campaign, which really amounted to scheduling her boss and screening calls, but Democratic members peppered her with questions as though she really managed Trump's PR and could not comprehend her responses.  After listening to the back and forthRep Peter King (R-NY) who'd known Trump for many years helped her out:
"And just like people in the White House say they can't control his tweets, you could not control his PR all the time",  to which she responded, "Correct" (p121)
Corey Lewandowski:
"The candidate and I, you may not believe this, but sometimes he goes off script and says what he wants to." (p.144)
Hope Hicks:
"His private comments echo his public comments" (p.66)
Jared Kushner: 
"Again, he controls his Twitter, and it comes from what's on his mind at the time" (p.104)(1)
Kushner summed it up:
"We had a very different type of campaign than most". (28) 
For most of the primary season, Trump's national staff consisted of Lewandowski, Hicks and Sam Clovis, with Donald Jr., Jared, and Ivanka providing family counsel. That was it.

Trump went through a senior political advisor (Roger Stone), prior to his announcement, and three campaign managers, Corey Lewandowski (June 2015-June 2016), Paul Manafort (June-August 2016), and Steve Bannon (August 2016).  Lewandowski hates Stone and Manafort and Bannon hated Manafort.

How Stone got dumped from the campaign depends on who you ask.  According to Lewandowski he fired Stone because, "I didn't believe he brought any value to the organization any longer" (p.54) and adding the following in a Q&A:
"Roger Stone is a liar"

"What did he lie to you about?"

"The time of day, the color of his tie, what color of shoes he was wearing, basically everything and everything." (p.66)
According to Stone, he resigned because he disagreed with Trump's plan to run a campaign based upon big rallies and the massive coverage the candidate was sure he could get from cable news networks.  In his testimony he admitted, "He was right, I was wrong." (p.21) (2)(3)

Lewandowski managed to alienate a lot of people around Trump, who referred to Hicks and he as "kids", particularly Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, who pushed for his removal.  There was also a real and pressing issue facing the campaign as the convention approached.  It looked like there would be a concerted effort by the Cruz campaign and other GOP figures to use convention rules to "steal" the nomination away from Trump and the campaign had no one who understand convention rules, and how to deal with delegates and effectively manage the event.  Paul Manafort, an experienced GOP political operator, seemed to fit the bill, and indeed he effectively managed the convention.

In his testimony, Lewandowski was blunt about his dislike and more significantly, his distrust of Manafort, believing he was self-dealing and stealing money from the campaign (Manafort's successor, Bannon, thought the same), though he couldn't prove it.

According to Bannon, the plan all along was to replace Manafort after the convention, but the timing was accelerated when Manafort's Ukrainian connections became a big media story (Hillary's campaign had been colluding with Ukranian sources on this).  Bannon said the Ukraine story was "a complete shock" to Trump and "he doesn't like surprises".

Hope Hicks told a funny story about Manafort's hiring.  Since Kushner had been responsible for Manafort's hiring, Trump assigned him to do the firing.  Hicks was with the candidate traveling by car in Louisiana the day Manafort was supposed to be fired.  Trump called Jared and Hicks recounts:
"you know has Paul been fired yet?  And Jared said no, I'm taking him out to breakfast first.  And I remember the response of, 'We don't need to buy him eggs.  Let him go'." (p.76)
Bannon portrayed himself as the campaign's savior.  Here's his version:
"When I came on this campaign, it's 84 days to go or 85 days to go, we're down by 16 points, double digits in every battleground state . . . it was about focus" (p.49)

"the perception was and reality was we were pretty far behind until the end" (p.194)

"we didn't have any money, not a lot of organization . . . it [the campaign]was driven by media" (p.237)
He claimed he advised Trump to only focus on three things, in addition to Clinton's corruption; stop mass illegal immigration and limit legal immigration; bring back manufacturing jobs; and end pointless foreign wars.

Bannon's testimony must have been embarrassing for him at times.  Though he'd left the White House a few months before, he had given interviews to notoriously unreliable author Michael Wolff who had just published Fire and Fury an explosive expose of the Trump White House in its early days.  Bannon, holding a grudge against Kushner who he blamed for being pushed out of the White House, was quoted as calling Jared a traitor for arranging the Trump Tower meetings and saying the chances that Don Jr didn't tell his dad about the meeting immediately after it happened "were zero". (4) 

Bannon squirmed around questions as to whether he was quoted directly, but his bad judgment in doing the interviews in the first place reinforced for me his unsuitability to be in the White House in any capacity.  He admitted he only knew what he read in the papers about the meeting and was unaware it was Don Jr, not Jared, who set it up.

With the loose organization, disorganization, and its small size and uncontrollable candidate the campaign was vulnerable.  And as Kushner noted there were, "lots of marginal characters, the campaign did have a lot of hanger-oners in different ways" (p.45).  It's two of those characters, George Papadopolous and Carter Page, we'll next turn to and explain the circumstances under which they became involved with the campaign and the havoc that ensued.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1)  Michael Caputo, New York State primary director for the campaign and later Director of Communications for Caucus Operations for the Convention, was fired by the campaign for tweeting a joyous cartoon celebrating the firing of Lewandowski.  In his testimony, Caputo remarked, "I want to stipulate here that the irony of me being fired for a tweet from the Trump campaign is not lost on me". (p.15) 

(2) And, consistent with Stone's behavior over the years, he lied in his testimony to the Intelligence Committee.   I downloaded a copy of his indictment by Mueller's goon squad to have handy while I read his testimony (I'd also followed the trial and was familiar with the evidence presented).  He lied, and he lied on items of no consequence to the issue of Russia collusion or hacks.  As Lewandowski commented, he lied because that's his habit.  It was idiotic, but allowed Mueller to add to the collusion narrative he was creating though the specifics of the indictment had nothing to do with collusion.  AG Barr was right in intervening to reduce the outrageous sentencing request by Mueller's minions, but Stone did lie and was properly convicted.  A fitting end to his career.

(3) Trump's unconventional campaign strategy was brilliant.  The cable news channels gave him more coverage than all of his GOP rivals combined.  He was great for ratings and for MSNBC and CNN it was like inserting a virus into the GOP race.  Even the mainstream newspapers, like the New York Times, were happy to give him disproportionate coverage early on.  His approach also supports my thesis that Trump never expected to win the nomination, let along the Presidency, because his primary motives were branding, thwarting Jeb Bush whom he hated, and having fun.  His strategy was the low-cost and very cost-effective way to go about this.

(4)  I'm convinced Donald Jr did not tell his dad about the meeting, either before or after it happened. I'll explain why in the post on the Trump Tower meeting.

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

53 Transcripts: Different Worlds, Part 1

Having completed reading the 53 transcripts recently released House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (which you can find here) as well as earlier reading many other relevant documents such as the IG and Mueller reports I can assure you there is no evidence showing collusion or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 elections, despite the continued insistence of Adam Schiff to the contrary.

Adam Schiff is the 21st century equivalent of Senator Joseph McCarthy yelling about the non-existent evidence he has of 205 card-carrying communists in the State Department.  Though, as I write this, an alternative way to think about it is Robert Mueller as the addled McCarthy-like frontman for an unethical, ambitious, and partisan lawyer, with Andrew Weissman as the modern version of Roy Cohn.

It's all part of the greatest political scandal of my lifetime and I look forward to the results of the Durham/Barr probe.

And please, will somebody finally tell me who Josef Mifsud was working for???

I'll use this post to reflect on some important background to the collusion allegations and investigation and over the next couple of weeks continue with the series of posts focused on specific aspects of the transcripts.

Reading the transcripts was like wading through Rachel Maddow's Greatest Hits.  Here are the various conspiracy theories covered by the committee (those I've written about or intend to write about are in boldface):
George Papadopolous, Josef Mifsud, and the alleged damaging information on Hillary

Carter Page as key link in collusion

Trump Tower Meeting

Trump Tower Moscow

Miss Universe Moscow and the "salacious allegations" (Fake news, but relevant because Russians.)

Russian Financiers of Trump Org (except there weren't any, but relevant because Russians)

Russian Condo Buyers (after Trump Tower was built, which contains condos separate from the office space, some of the original condo purchasers resold their unit to Russian buyers.  The Trump Organization was not involved but somehow this was relevant because Russians.)

Russian Buying Florida Mansion (Trump bought a Florida mansion and sold it a few years later to a Russian and made tens of millions.  Relevant because Russians.)

Deutsche Bank (so stupid even the D's on the committee gave up on this one.)

Alfa Bank  (Russian owned bank with its servers allegedly connected directly with Trump Org.  Fake news, but relevant because Russians)

Ukraine Plank on GOP Platform

Paul Manafort.  (Supposed co-mastermind behind it all.  Not.  Targeted by Ukrainians working with Hillary Campaign in 2016).

Michael Flynn & The Ruskies

Peter Smith (An eccentric 80 year old GOP supporter who had been trying to find Hillary hacked emails via the Dark Web and who had contact with Michael Flynn.  In 2017, Smith committed suicide after speaking to a reporter from the Wall St Journal which subsequently published an article on his quest.)

The Hacks (DNC, DCCC, John Podesta)

Wikileaks (Bumbling clowns Roger Stone and Jerome Corsi try to get info from Assange but fail).

Michael Cohen in Prague.  (And, according to Steele Dossier, co-mastermind with Manafort of collusion.  I was surprised and impressed with Cohen's testimony - precise, knows the real estate world, impassioned rebuttal of the Steele Dossier, and refused to be pushed around by Schiff and Swalwell.)

Cambridge Analytica.  (Bad because it used data from Facebook, unlike the Obama people in 2012 who were good because they used data from Facebook.)

The 53 interviews cover 5,571 pages and are of 49 individuals (Corey Lewandowski, Steve Bannon, John Podesta, and David Kramer were interviewed twice).  The interviews began in June 2017 and extended into March 2018 with 39 of the 53 in the period from late September to mid-January (and 17 between Dec 4 and 22).  Two witnesses, both with FusionGPS, took the 5th so gave no testimony: Peter Fritsch and Thomas Catan.

Witnesses included 6 of the 8 participants in the Trump Tower meeting of June 2016, Keith Schiller, head of security for the Trump Organization and Trump's personal bodyguard, and Rhona Graff, Trump's administrative assistant since 1987, along with 13 others who worked on the Trump campaign, including three of the four campaign senior advisors or managers (Roger Stone, Corey Lewandowski, Steve Bannon) along with Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr.

Eleven of the transcripts contain redactions so, at times, it is difficult to understand the context of the unredacted materials.  For instance in two of the interviews there is reference to intelligence received by FBI Director Comey in the summer of 2016 that led him to decide to make the decision on the Clinton email investigation himself, but the details are redacted.  The heaviest redacted transcripts were of Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, James Clapper, Andrew McCabe, and an unidentified FBI Special Agent.  Interviews with fewer redactions were of Samantha Power, Mary McCord (DOJ), John Carlin (DOJ), Evelyn Farkas (DoD), Dan Coats, and Matthew Tait (formerly of UK Intelligence).

Regarding the unidentified FBI Special Agent.  This individual was the original contact for Christopher Steele regarding the dossier (he'd previously met Steele, who was a paid FBI source, in 2009).  He was responsible for getting Steele in touch with the appropriate offices within the FBI.  Other than passing Steele on, he had no involvement in verification of the dossier contents, nor in the FISA warrant application.  The agent heard back from FBI HQ in late September that "information in the Steele dossier corroborated an investigation they had opened previously . . ." (p.36) (1)  He had no knowledge of the connection with the Clinton Campaign, was appalled to find out Steele had been briefing reporters, and expressed his strong support for terminating him.  Came across as professional and credible.

Some of the transcripts were fascinating, some boring, and a few quite funny and entertaining, particularly Corey Lewandowski, Rob Goldstone (the music promoter who set up the Trump Tower meeting) and Felix Sater, the real estate promoter working with Michael Cohen on the Trump Tower Moscow project.

The committee conducted more than 53 interviews.  It previously released its November 14, 2017 interview with Glenn Simpson of FusionGPS which is a conspiracy theory fantasy.  There are also references to additional interviews which the committee did not vote to release.  In addition, other Congressional committees were conducting interviews around the same time, notably of James Comey by the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8, 2017 and of George Papadopolous by the House Judiciary Committee on October 25, 2018.

The title of this post, "Different Worlds" is a twofold reference.  First to the different political world in which the interviews took place, 2017 is very different from 2020.  Second, the different worlds of real estate promoter BS and that of political operative BS.  They are both BS worlds but so different in their orientation it contributed to the Democratic belief that Trump was a creature from another planet and to the bafflement of the Democrats on the committee as they tried to understand the very unconventional Trump campaign and the financial world of Trumpdom (to be covered in Part 2).

The Political Landscape in 2017

When the Intelligence Committee began its interviews in June 2017 things looked very different than they did in 2019 and 2020.  The Committee was focused on four issues:
Russia's actions with respect to the 2016 election cycle
With whom, if anyone, in the United States did they work with?
The US government response during that period
The role of masking, unmasking in the dissemination of classified information
Though the Republicans controlled the House, the Intelligence Committee was without the services of its chairman, Devin Nunes (R-CA) until the end of the year.  In a clever maneuver, Democrats filed an ethics complaint against Nunes in March 2017, claiming he had leaked classified information in order to help Donald Trump, meaning the first Republican on the committee to smell something was seriously wrong was neutralized.  Nunes was not cleared until the end of 2017, so GOP leadership on the committee fell upon Mike Conaway (R-TX) who, along with Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and Tom Rooney (R-FL) were the most active Republican questioners.  Gowdy and Rooney left Congress in 2018, while Conaway is not running for reelection this year.  Of the other active questioners, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) retired in 2018 and Peter King (R-NY) retiring this year, leaving Chris Stewart (R-Utah) and Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) as the only GOP questioners who will be left in January 2021.  In contrast, only one of the seven active Democrats during the interviews will have left.

Though today most Republicans in Congress are solidly, though some reluctantly, behind President Trump; that was not true in 2017.  The change came about for three reasons:
1.  With the Mueller Report, the IG Report and a flood of other documentation, the extent of the conspiracy against Trump is now evident, the recklessness of agency bureaucrats, the complicity of the media, along with 3+ years of unprecedented obstruction by Democrats in Congress.
2.  The Kavanaugh hearings made it clear that all Republicans will be attacked just like Trump, no one is immune.
3.  The power of Trump with the GOP electorate making Senators and Representatives worried about getting on his wrong side.
But in 2017, Trump's relations with Congress were frayed, his behavior erratic and one never knew where he stood on his own proposals.  Whatever they said publicly, a significant percentage were unhappy he was President.

And on Russia, the President's own behavior made them fear there might be something to the collusion allegations.  The President had commented favorably on Putin, but more than that had put America on the same relative moral plane as Russia.  He had, in his view, merely joked about Hillary's emails but it didn't seem so funny when hacked Democratic emails started showing up in the midst of the campaign (2).   Dark stories about Russian connections were floating around about Carter Page, George Papadopolous, and Paul Manafort and then came the Michael Flynn stories and his resignation.  January saw the publication of the Steele Dossier, about which no one knew the origins.  In May came the firing of Comey, and then the capper, when the President could not stay on script and contradicted the reasons for the firing in his interview with Lester Holt and then gloated to the Russian Ambassador about the firing.  It looked terrible.  And then, three weeks after the committee's first interview (Dan Coats), came news about the Trump Tower meeting which occurred in June 2016.  And let's face it, how many of us are confident that if Trump had actually been presented with a quid pro quo arrangement with Putin that he would have refused?

The truth about the Steele Dossier, that the Clinton campaign paid for it and that there was a direct link between that campaign and Russian intelligence sources, did not begin to emerge until late October 2017 and even then the Democrats managed to muddy the water for a while longer, falsely claiming FusionGPS was just continuing opposition research work it had been doing for a Republican donor (3).

I don't think all the GOP members of the committee knew where the investigation was going to end up when it started and the existence of the Mueller investigation further concerned and constrained them.

While there were interviews focused on the unmaskings and the Obama administration response they were not particularly revealing, except as to the extent of the unmaskings.  As to the response, or lack of it, the line by the Democratic interviewees is that the Obama administration worried that if it made a big deal of Russian interference during the campaign it might backfire and be seen as a political intervention.  Left unsaid was that they feared the intervention might hurt Hillary and there was no need to take that risk since they all expected Hillary to easily win.

That left the Democrats free to play a lot of offense, though many of the Republican members were able to effectively help witnesses.  The leading Democrat questioners were Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell.  Schiff was a very skillful questioner.  In contrast, Swalwell acted like he was always on the verge of asking the one question that would unravel the entire conspiracy and evidenced a very high opinion of his own abilities.  I think Schiff realized fairly quickly the Democrats were drilling a dry hole in the search for a conspiracy but understood the political advantage of continuing the charade.  Swalwell was dumb enough he may really have been a true believer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) So, with the twisted reasoning we've seen elsewhere in this investigation, the FBI used a dossier that it was never able to corroborate, in order to corroborate the accuracy of the investigation it had previously opened.

(2) In her testimony, Hope Hicks, Trump’s communications director spoke to that specific incident:
“I did make him aware that there were some that were taking this sort of facetious comment to be literal and that we needed to make sure people understood that it was intended to mock those that were suggesting he could possibly be involved with the hack.”
She said Trump, “expressed sort of disbelief that anybody could possibly take it seriously”. (p.60)

(3) On December 12, 2017 the committee interviewed Michael Goldfarb, publisher of the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication funded by Paul Singer who backed Marco Rubio for the GOP nomination.  Goldfarb hired FusionGPS to do research on the financial history of the Trump organization (he hired other firms to do oppo research on Hillary).

In April 2016, once Trump seemed assured of the GOP nomination, Goldfarb had FusionGPS end its research and it was at this point Glenn Simpson of Fusion approached the Clinton campaign offering to continue the research.  Steele was not hired until June.

Goldfarb was furious, not just about the dossier when he learned about it, saying "I thought it was bullshit" (p.36), but upon finding out that Fusion was working with a Russian oligarch to overturn the Magnitsky Act, while Goldfarb had worked closely with Michael Browder, the main proponent of the Act.

Sunday, May 24, 2020

53 Transcripts: Whose Testimony Was Accurate?

Scene One:

On July 17, 2017, James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) during the Obama Administration testified at a session of the House Intelligence Committee.

Rep Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) read him two quotes from testimony the National Intelligence Officer (NIO*) for Russia had given when briefing the committee on December 5, 2016:
"In terms of favoring one candidate or another, you know, the evidence is a little bit unclear."
"It's unclear to us that the Kremlin had a particular - that they had a particular favorite or they wanted to see a particular outcome.  That is what the reporting shows." (pp16-17)
Yet on January 6, 2017 Clapper released the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) on Russian interference with the election which concluded, " We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump".  Wenstrup asked if the statements made by the NIO on December 5 were accurate and complete.  Clapper said no, they were not.  Because of extensive redactions in the transcript that followed this exchange it is not possible to determine if Clapper offered an explanation as to why the assessment changed in the intervening month or, in the alternative, why a senior CIA official was giving inaccurate information to the Intelligence Committee.

Clapper also testified that the ICA didn't talk about collusion because they didn't have any evidence "that met the evidentiary threshold"(p.46), yet the FBI and DOJ had vouched for the reliability of the collusion allegations made in the Steele Dossier when officials from both agencies signed the Carter Page FISA warrant application in October 2016.

Scene Two:

On June 22, 2017, Dan Coats, DNI testified.  In March, after Coats' confirmation, James Comey briefed him on collusion, telling Coats, "There is smoke but no fire on the issue of collusion" (p.6),  "There is nothing to indicate collusion with the President" (p.27), and then adding:
"We are only looking at one person who had some role in the campaign [Carter Page]". (p.6)
Yet the Crossfire Hurricane investigation specifically named four targeted individuals, Page, Papadopolous, Manafort, and Flynn, while the most recent FISA renewal application in January 2017 had referenced Papadopolous and Manafort, in addition to Page.  Moreover, as was recently revealed, the investigation into Flynn was not closed as recommended in early January.

Scene Three:

Andrew McCabe testified on December 19, 2017.  Consistent with prior testimony given by Comey, McCabe stated that the FBI Director began writing memos of his meetings with Trump because of concerns about the frequency and content of his conversations with the President.  Rep Trey Gowdy pointed out that could not be true because Comey began writing memos right after his first meeting with Trump on January 6 - indeed Comey arranged in advance to have a setup in his car that would allow him to write a memo immediately upon ending the meeting with the President-elect. After that meeting, Comey told Clapper the "President-elect was very defensive about it" (Clapper interview p. 51), the "it" being the allegation he consorted with several prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room (I'm being circumspect here about the specifics of the allegation).  In Comey's mind, Trump's defensiveness (about an incident that never happened) was an indication of guilt.

Gowdy also asked why the FBI began drafting a non-indictment statement when Clinton and others were still to be interviewed in the email investigation; why wasn't there also an indictment draft?  McCabe stated there was no consideration given to drafting a statement regarding an indictment recommendation.

-------------------------------------------------------
* National Intelligence Officers are appointed by the Director of the CIA, report directly to the Director, and are responsible for all intelligence matters within their geographical area.

Saturday, May 23, 2020

53 Transcripts: Heads I Win, Tails You Lose

On July 25, 2017 Jared Kushner testified at the House Intelligence Committee and his testimony is one of the recently released transcripts.  Kushner was completely cooperative with the committee and stated several times his willingness to stay until all of the committee's questions were answered.  Finally, Rep Trey Gowdy (R-SC) told him:
"I appreciate your willingness to stay until my friends run out of questions.  But I also have to let you know.  That's never going to happen.  The longer you stay in here, the narrative will be how important and significant a witness you were, hence the fact that they kept you in here all day long".
On the other hand:
"If you do what any reasonable person would do" [cut it off at some point] "then they will say that you left before you answered all the questions . . . you cannot win, regardless of what you do". (p. 100).
The same pattern happened with several witnesses.  And the Democrats even leaked as these supposedly confidential interviews were occurring.  In the middle of his testimony on December 14, 2017, Alexander Nix (CEO of Cambridge Analytica) complained he had just learned the fact he was being interviewed and a summary of his testimony so far had been leaked to Reuters, which had just published a story!

Tuesday, May 19, 2020

53 Transcripts: Flynn Flam

I've now finished reading all 53 transcripts (5,571 pages) and will begin writing posts trying to put it together but wanted to write on Michael Flynn in light of new developments in his case and how it ties into the testimony in the transcripts.

Catherine Herridge of CBS News has the full unredacted version of Susan Rice's famous "by the book" memo, written to herself, on January 20, 2017 regarding the January 5, 2017 meeting involving President Obama, VP Biden, herself, Sally Yates, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan. [CORRECTION: Clapper & Brennan were not at this meeting.  They attended the meeting immediately prior regarding the Intelligence Community Assessment regarding Russian interference in the 2016 election.] The existence of the memo has been known since 2018 but one paragraph had been completely redacted.  It is now available:
Director Comey affirmed that he is proceeding "by the book" as it relates to law enforcement. From a national security perspective, Comey said he does have some concerns that incoming NSA Flynn is speaking frequently with Russian ambassador Kisylak. Comey said that could be an issue as it relates to sharing sensitive information. President Obama asked if Comey was saying the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn. Comey replied "potentially". He added that he has no indication thus far that Flynn has passed classified information to Kisylak but he noted "the level of communication was unusual".
My guess is the memo went through several careful drafts before reaching its final version.
I believe its purpose fourfold.

(1) Justify withholding of sensitive information during the last two weeks of the transition.

(2) Creating an "I told you so" if it turned out Flynn was compromising national security (Obama warned Trump against appointing Flynn)

(3) Justifying Comey's continued investigation of Flynn.

(4) Making sure Comey was the fall guy if it all went wrong.

It was no secret the intelligence community and President Obama had no use for General Flynn after  he left the administration in 2014.  He'd had major policy disagreements with the President and been public about his opinion of the quality of the intelligence agencies work product and leadership and having him as NSA meant their shortcomings would become public and the current organizational structure and embedded careerists threatened.

It is evident that from the time he left government service the intelligence community (including friendly foreign intelligence services) were keeping an eye on Flynn and he did himself no favors by miscues such as accepting payment from RT TV to attend a December 2015 dinner in Moscow where he was seated next to Putin.

How widespread the surveillance of Flynn was is still unknown.  According to a story that broke yesterday a whistleblower at the Treasury Dept claims officials there were improperly tracking Flynn's finances as far back as 2015. While we only have the anonymous source at this point it is worth investigating to see if the story can be confirmed.

In addition, in early 2017, just after Flynn's resignation, a story broke, first in the U.K. and then in the U.S., that Flynn was having an affair with a Russian emigre and academic at Cambridge who was allegedly a intelligence operative for the Kremlin. What is of particular significance is that while the story only became public in 2017, I learned from reading the recently released House Intelligence Committee transcripts, that David J Kramer, an associate of Senator McCain, was told in September 2016 by Christopher Steele about the alleged affair (p.57) meaning the story was already in circulation in intelligence circles and part of a planned operation to destroy Flynn's reputation. The Russian in question is Svetlana Lokhova, who quite strongly, with documentation and, I think, convincingly, denied having an affair and being a Russian operative and has had her career destroyed as a result of the story.  It is astonishing to see how the conspirators converted a dinner with several academics into a passionate affair by Flynn with a Russia agent.  Moreover, the Mueller Report does not confirm the story and, as we know well, if it had the tiniest scrap of evidence otherwise it would have played it up.

Flynn was frequently in contact with Kisylak during the transition. In fact, Rice testified to the House Intelligence Committee, that in late November 2016, the head of Trump's National Security Council transition team, Marshall Billingslea, expressed concerned to her and her staff about Flynn's frequent conversations with Kisylak and asked for background on the ambassador, "that he seemed to want to use to persuade General Flynn that perhaps he should scale back the contacts". (p.44) [CORRECTION: Billingslea did not express his concern directly to Rice; Rice was informed of his concern via her chief of staff Susie George.  Billingslea was also removed as head of this transition team at some point during the transition.]

This incident involving Billingslea became public in early May 2017 as part of the avalanche of press reports about the alleged collusion of the Trump campaign and administration with Russia.  Here's a typical example.  All of the stories contain the same note regarding sources;
"based on interviews with 11 current and former U.S. officials, including seven with key roles in the Obama administration."
That implies four of the sources did not have key roles in the Obama Administration.  Whether they were officials in that administration who did not have key roles or served in the Bush administration or were now in the Trump administration cannot be determined.  And they are collectively cited as sources for the article which contains information beyond the Billingslea incident.

Billingslea has never publicly commented on the matter.   He is currently Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing at the Treasury Dept. and on May 4 was nominated to be Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs.  During the Bush administration, Billingslea held a number of senior positions at the Department of Defense.

However, as Rice's memo notes, as of January 5, Comey had no evidence Flynn shared classified information with the Russians. Moreover, the dislike of Flynn had another basis beyond the mutual disdain between he and the intelligence community - there was a basic policy disagreement. Flynn thought China a bigger threat than Russia; the Obama administration thought the opposite.
In her House Intelligence Committee testimony of September 8, 2017 Rice complained:
"We spent a lot more time talking about China in part because General Flynn's focus was on China as our principal overarching adversary. He had many questions and concerns about China. And when I elicited - sought to elicit his perspective on Russia, he was quite, I started to say dismissive, but that may be an overstatement. He downplayed his assessment of Russia as a threat to the United States. He called it overblown. He said they're a declining power, they're demographically challenged, they're not really much of a threat, and then reemphasized the importance of China." (pp.46-47)
Rice's statement is ironic, coming from the administration which ridiculed Mitt Romney in 2012 for his claim that Russia was our #1 adversary (Mitt was wrong, by the way) while at the same time President Obama was caught on mic with Medvedev telling him to pass on a message to Putin that he'd have more flexibility after the election to screw our allies in Eastern Europe.  And it was President Obama who appeased Russia's ambitions in the Middle East in order to get them to help with Putin's Iranian allies.

Let's not forget the operation to "get" Michael Flynn had two sequentially independent components. The first was to remove Flynn as NSA, a position where he could do damage to the intelligence community bureaucracy and the legacy of the Obama administration. That was accomplished when he resigned in February 2017 and the conspirators had no further interest in pursuing him. After that, Comey and McCabe were relaxed enough to admit in testimony that the interviewing FBI agents had not thought Flynn lied in his interview.

Things changed when the Mueller gang arrived on the scene. They wanted to pursue Flynn in a criminal investigation to pressure him to turn on Donald Trump. When he refused to do so, they pursued an alternative course, bringing a criminal prosecution to provide added fodder for the Russia collusion narrative to be used by the media in order to help the Democratic Party in the 2018 midterms.

My view is that Flynn was correct on the policy issue.  Russia is not our friend and Putin would like to see a hobbled and weakened America (the media and the Democratic Party have helped him in that respect) but the biggest threat to American security and the rest of the free world is China.  The challenge for America today is to develop a strategy, with other countries, to contain China and as part of that to find if there is a path to move Russia away from being China's junior partner.  I also think he was also correct on the need for massive reform and cleaning out of our intelligence agencies.  Flynn's lack of discipline in the RT TV matter, the Turkish government lobbying, and in not minimizing contacts with the Russian ambassador during the transition period, particularly when he knew the security apparatus was gunning for him, contributed to his own downfall.  The criminal prosecution however, is a disgrace, should never have been filed, and should be dismissed.