Does it seem awfully convenient to anyone else that Michael Flynn, a man appointed by Obama to be the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2012 before subsequently being forced into early retirement just 2 years later for being critical of that same administration’s handling of the Iran deal, and terrorism threats generally for that matter, has fallen victim to a series of intelligence leaks from a variety agencies undoubtedly staffed with Obama loyalists just 24 days into his tenure as Trump’s National Security Advisor? If so, you’re certainly not alone in questioning the circumstances leading up to Flynn’s forced resignation last night.
In fact, earlier today WikiLeaks tweeted that Flynn was forced to resign as the result of a “destabilization campaign by US spies, Democrats, and the press.”
Meanwhile, the Washington Free Beacon (WFB), courtesy of anonymous, inside sources, has provided some context for what they describe as the culmination of a secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald Trump’s national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran via a behind-the-scenes effort to plant a series of damaging stories about Flynn in the national media.
The effort, said to include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes, included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn’s credibility in order to handicap the Trump administration’s efforts to disclose secret details of the nuclear deal with Iran that had been long hidden by the Obama administration.
According to the WFB’s sources, tensions between the Obama administration and Flynn escalated after he was forced into early retirement from his post as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency in April 2014. Suddenly freed of his obligation to tow the party line, Flynn became publicly critical of the administration’s handling of the Iran deal as well as its efforts to coverup classified documents recovered from the Osama bin Laden raid that allegedly proved Iran’s close relationship with al Qaeda.
Eli Lake, a Bloomberg View columnist and veteran national security reporter well sourced in the White House, told the Free Beacon that Flynn earned a reputation in the Obama administration as one of its top detractors.
“Michael Flynn was one of the Obama administration’s fiercest critics after he was forced out of the Defense Intelligence Agency,” said Lake, who described “the political assassination of Michael Flynn” in his column published early Tuesday.
“[Flynn] was a withering critic of Obama’s biggest foreign policy initiative, the Iran deal,” Lake said. “He also publicly accused the administration of keeping classified documents found in the Osama bin Laden raid that showed Iran’s close relationship with al Qaeda. He was a thorn in their side.”
But when Flynn was chosen by Trump as National Security Advisor, Obama loyalists knew that their “sacred deal” was at risk of being exposed and took steps to preemptively discredit him at all costs.
“It’s undeniable that the campaign to discredit Flynn was well underway before Inauguration Day, with a very troublesome and politicized series of leaks designed to undermine him,” said one veteran national security adviser with close ties to the White House team. “This pattern reminds me of the lead up to the Iran deal, and probably features the same cast of characters.”
“It’s actually Ben Rhodes, NIAC, and the Iranian mullahs who are celebrating today,” said one veteran foreign policy insider who is close to Flynn and the White House. “They know that the number one target is Iran … [and] they all knew their little sacred agreement with Iran was going to go off the books. So they got rid of Flynn before any of the [secret] agreements even surfaced.”
Flynn had been preparing to publicize many of the details about the nuclear deal that had been intentionally hidden by the Obama administration as part of its effort to garner support for the deal, these sources said.
As sources told the WFB, Flynn’s ouster was “not the result of a series of random events” but rather a coordinated effort of “nameless, faceless bureaucrats” who were able to take out a National Security Advisor “based on a campaign of innuendo” and completely devoid of any tangible evidence.
One senior White House official told the Free Beacon that leaks targeting the former official were “not the result of a series of random events.”
“The drumbeat of leaks of sensitive material related to General Flynn has been building since he was named to his position,” said the official, who is a member of the White House’s National Security Council. “Last night was not the result of a series of random events. The president has lost a valuable adviser and we need to make sure this sort of thing does not happen again.”
Other sources expressed concern that public trust in the intelligence community would be eroded by the actions of employees with anti-Trump agendas.
“The larger issue that should trouble the American people is the far-reaching power of unknown, unelected apparatchiks in the Intelligence Community deciding for themselves both who serves in government and what is an acceptable policy they will allow the elected representatives of the people to pursue,” said the national security adviser quoted above.
“Put aside the issue of Flynn himself; that nameless, faceless bureaucrats were able to take out a president’s national security adviser based on a campaign of innuendo without evidence should worry every American,” the source explained.
“The Obama administration knew that Flynn was going to release the secret documents around the Iran deal, which would blow up their myth that it was a good deal that rolled back Iran,” the source said. “So in December the Obama NSC started going to work with their favorite reporters, selectively leaking damaging and incomplete information about Flynn.”
“After Trump was inaugurated some of those people stayed in and some began working from the outside, and they cooperated to keep undermining Trump,” the source said, detailing a series of leaks from within the White House in the past weeks targeting Flynn. “Last night’s resignation was their first major win, but unless the Trump people get serious about cleaning house, it won’t be the last.”
Of course, while interesting, as always, we suggest a healthy dose of skepticism when contemplating the remarks of anonymous sources and leave it to you to decipher fact from fiction. So what say you, dear reader, was Flynn’s ouster the result of a simple “miscommunication” or a series of secret political maneuvers by Obama loyalists to undermine the Trump intelligence apparatus and protect their vulnerable Iran deal?