In revisiting the Eric Lichtblau article in the New York Times from October 31, 2016 on the Alfa allegations, I came across something quite interesting.
Devil's advocate: Suppose there was a series of briefings across August and September, and the phony Alfa Bank stuff doesn't get briefed to congress until a meeting on, say, September 21, a couple days after Joffe - er, I mean Sussmann - presented the info to the FBI.
Maybe the anti-Trump conspirators knew there would be something along these lines forthcoming, but in early meetings, the briefings to Congress only allude to it and they say they are looking into it. Then in September, they have their phony ducks in a row and present the Alfa gobbledygook to the FBI and the FBI runs and briefs it to Congress.
Wouldn't that technically fall under the description in the article? That is, they started briefing generally on possible financial ties in August and that set the table for presenting the Alfa crap in September?
It’s plausible. Its hard to see them running to Congress immediately after receiving the white papers before they had done any vetting of them.
Its also possible Lichtblau was just wrong, or, that someone told Lichtblau that it HAD been briefed in order to bolster the narrative. The Lichtblau story originally was going to go all the way and explode onto the scene and the eventual October 31 article was only a distant shell of that because the NYT editor got cold feet.
You’re a dog. Russiagate is a bone. Keep tracking and I’ll keep sending kibble.
Looks like an interesting fresh angle. God bless.
Devil's advocate: Suppose there was a series of briefings across August and September, and the phony Alfa Bank stuff doesn't get briefed to congress until a meeting on, say, September 21, a couple days after Joffe - er, I mean Sussmann - presented the info to the FBI.
Maybe the anti-Trump conspirators knew there would be something along these lines forthcoming, but in early meetings, the briefings to Congress only allude to it and they say they are looking into it. Then in September, they have their phony ducks in a row and present the Alfa gobbledygook to the FBI and the FBI runs and briefs it to Congress.
Wouldn't that technically fall under the description in the article? That is, they started briefing generally on possible financial ties in August and that set the table for presenting the Alfa crap in September?
It’s plausible. Its hard to see them running to Congress immediately after receiving the white papers before they had done any vetting of them.
Its also possible Lichtblau was just wrong, or, that someone told Lichtblau that it HAD been briefed in order to bolster the narrative. The Lichtblau story originally was going to go all the way and explode onto the scene and the eventual October 31 article was only a distant shell of that because the NYT editor got cold feet.