Fair question. The answer was revealed in one of bongino’s videos over the last two or three days, of course I am referring to last weeks’ episodes.
Logically, it is sort of a piece of triangulation. We know that there were 29 requests to unmask Flynn.... by the usual Clapper, Brennan, Biden, Comey Etc but also by the Secretary of Energy and I think the Secretary of the Interior. I can’t find you the exact spot where this was revealed. But I will look and see if I can.
In essence, the claim has been made that Flynn lied about discussing *sanctions* with kislyak on the telephone call which led to the multiple unmasking requests. That means that Flynn was masked prior to that date.
Now it may be true that at this moment in time the transcripts of Flynn’s call has not been released. However, I believe there is testimony to the effect that sanctions were not discussed nor mentioned in any way on the phone call that generated all those unmasking requests. Keep in mind, the sanctions that Obama imposed were not news at that point...... they had been imposed a few months earlier. This is kind of a subtle point, but the point is is that Flynn has been accused of lying about having discussed sanctions with kislyak. When the sanctions where the product of the Obama Administration. And it is certainly plausible that kislyak might have wanted to have those sanctions relaxed or removed. What WAS news, was the expulsion of the diplomats ordered by Obama. The Salient Point here is that Flynn is being accused of lying about sanctions, when sanctions were not mentioned in the call that generated all the unmasking requests. So it is kind of a case that if kislyak was concerned about sanctions, and presumably he would be, he didn’t talk to Flynn about that any earlier then the call he placed to Flynn when Flynn was in the Dominican Republic. To me it just seems quite a bit more logical that kislyak’S call to Flynn occurred as an immediate reaction to the expulsions, NOT over the sanctions which were old news at that point.
I will try to find you the spot in bongino’s episode where to my way of thinking this conclusion can be fairly safely reached.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLYh4jljkaM
start ~~25:51
Flynn is i'viewed by the FBI (Strzok and Priestap) inside the White House. The notes from that meeting are to be placed upon the fabled "302" form.
We do not have the original 302. Instead, we have a Strzok-edited 302, created weeks later. We don't have the i'view transcript but we have that "post dated" 302.
The accusation of Flynn lying about [whatever] MUST originate from conclusions based upon one or the version of the Flynn 302. Would you agree? Stated differently, that interview is the time and situs of Flynn alleged lying to the FBI and thus the basis of bringing up of charges against Flynn.
Original 302 or not;
The notes taken by the FBI DO NOT MENTION THE WORD SANCTIONS. Not once. SO HOW CAN FLYNN BE ACCUSED OF LYING ABOUT SANCTIONS WHEN THE TOPIC OF SANCTIONS WAS NEVER MENTIONED IN THE INTERVIEW?. Riddle me that.
Answer: It never happened. Do you honestly believe that if there was a belief within the FBI that Flynn had lied about discussing "sanctions" with K, (something he has denied multiple times) that he would not be asked DIRECTLY AND POINTEDLY about same? Impossible to believe.