Reading the mainstream media headlines relating to the flipping of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn to provide evidence relating to the allegations about Russian interference in America’s last presidential election requires the suspension of one’s cognitive processes.
Ignoring completely what had actually occurred, the “Russian story” with its subset of “getting Trump” was on display all through the weekend, both in the print and on the live media.
It involves the use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to set-up Flynn shortly after he had been installed as National Security Adviser.
Insofar as I can determine, the FBI entrapment of Flynn has only been examined in a serious way in the media by Robert Parry at Consortium News.
Flynn asked the Russians not to reciprocate, making the point that there would be a new administration in place in three weeks and the relationship between the two countries might change for the better.
Kislyak apparently convinced Russian President Vladimir Putin not to go tit-for-tat.
Kislyak took the call but did not agree to veto Security Council Resolution 2334, which passed unanimously on December 23 from a beach in the Dominican Republic, where he was on vacation, may have been ordered by Trump himself.
It was a response to an Obama move to expel Russian diplomats and close two Embassy buildings over allegations of Moscow’s interfering in the 2016 election.
He and his family have extensive ties both to Israel and to Netanyahu personally, to include Netanyahu’s staying at the Kushner family home in New York.
The Kushner Family Foundation has funded some of Israel’s illegal settlements and also a number of conservative political groups in that country.
The first citation reads “He also lied when he said he did not ask Kislyak to delay or defeat a vote on a pending U. Security Council resolution…” and the second is “Prosecutors also say that a senior member of the transition team on Dec.
22 directed Flynn to contact officials from Russia and other governments about their stance on the U. resolution ‘and to influence those governments to delay the vote or defeat the resolution.’” Does omitting Israel and emphasizing the Russian aspect of the story throughout the rest of the piece change what it says and how it is perceived? For me, there was also a second take-away from the Flynn story apart from the collusion with Israel.
Based on the information revealed regarding the two conversations, and, unlike the highly nuance-sensitive editors working for the mainstream media, this is the headline that I would have written for a featured article based on what I consider to be important: , was made by Flynn at the direction of Jared Kushner, who in turn had been approached by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Kushner, acting for Netanyahu, asked Flynn to contact each delegate from the various countries on the Security Council to delay or kill the resolution.