The 10 Events You Need To Know To Understand The Michael Flynn Story
December 5, 2017 by admin
Filed under Lingerie Events
Comments Off
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn arrives for his plea hearing at the Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, D.C. Special counsel Robert Mueller charged Flynn with one count of making a false statement to the FBI.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn arrives for his plea hearing at the Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, D.C. Special counsel Robert Mueller charged Flynn with one count of making a false statement to the FBI.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
If the saga of Michael Flynn feels like it’s been hanging over President Trump’s head since inauguration day, that’s because it has.
The story of how Trump’s first national security adviser came to plead guilty to lying to FBI investigators and cooperate in the special counsel’s Russia investigation spans two presidential terms and also touches government officials who were subsequently fired by Trump.
Here are 10 key events that explain why Flynn was legally vulnerable in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe and why his plea deal addresses one of the central questions in the wider Russia imbroglio.
1. President Obama sanctions Russia
On Dec. 28, 2016, then-President Obama ejects 35 Russian diplomats from the United States and introduces new sanctions against a number of Russian security services and individuals.
The move is retribution for Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, detailed in the unclassified summary of a highly classified report by the intelligence community early in the new year.
2. Flynn confers with transition officials and talks sanctions with Russia
On Dec. 29, Flynn speaks with the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, as well as a “senior official” of the presidential transition team, according to court documents in Flynn’s case.
The documents describe how Flynn spoke his colleague in the administration-in-waiting — identified by some outlets as former deputy national security adviser K.T. McFarland — about what to tell the Russian ambassador about the sanctions. Then he spoke with Kislyak on the phone.
“Flynn called the Russian ambassador and requested that Russia not escalate the situation and only respond to the U.S. sanctions in a reciprocal manner,” say the court documents. The Trump camp wants to offer Moscow the prospect for a better relationship once Trump is inaugurated.
On Dec. 31, Kislyak calls Flynn back and says Russia indeed will not escalate, as he asked. Russian President Vladimir Putin confirms that with a public announcement, which Trump hails on Twitter.
Great move on delay (by V. Putin) – I always knew he was very smart!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 30, 2016
3. Pence denies Flynn talked sanctions
After a Washington Post report alludes to Flynn’s conversation, the administration-in-waiting begins denying they discussed sanctions. Not only is there suspicion about the issue itself, the question is raised about whether Flynn might have violated an obscure law that forbids Americans out of government from negotiating on behalf of the United States.
So on Jan. 15, then-Vice President-elect Mike Pence makes a case to CBS’ Face the Nation.
“What I can confirm, having spoken to him about it, is that those conversations that happened to occur around the time that the United States took action to expel diplomats had nothing whatsoever to do with those sanctions,” Pence said.
But the FBI, which was monitoring Kislyak’s communications, knew that wasn’t so.
4. FBI investigators interview Flynn
On Jan. 24, Flynn gives a voluntary interview to FBI investigators looking at Russian interference.
In this interview, according to the charging documents, Flynn makes false statements about whether he asked Kislyak to refrain from “escalating the situation.” He also says that he doesn’t remember the follow-up conversation in which Kislyak confirms Russia’s decision regarding a sanctions escalation.
Mueller’s team also now says Flynn made false statements in the interview about calls he made regarding a United Nations Security Council resolution.
5. Sally Yates warns the White House about Flynn
On Jan. 26, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates meets with White House counsel Don McGahn to warn him the Justice Department had evidence, via the FBI surveillance, that what Pence was saying publicly was inaccurate.
“We told him we felt like the vice president and others were entitled to know that the information that they were conveying to the American people wasn’t true,” Yates said in testimony to a Senate Judiciary panel in May.
She adds that because Russian diplomatic and intelligence officials also knew about the content of the conversations — and probably had their own proof of them — Flynn was vulnerable to blackmail.
“We believed that Gen. Flynn was compromised with respect to the Russians,” she said. “To state the obvious, you don’t want your national security adviser compromised by the Russians.”
Yates and McGahn meet again the next day, Jan. 27, and they begin discussing ways that White House officials might review the evidence the FBI has about Flynn.
But Yates is fired by Trump three days later, after announcing she would not defend his travel restrictions on refugees and visa holders from seven majority-Muslim countries.
The White House also says McGahn told Trump about Yates’ warning that Flynn had lied to Pence, and likely given the same account to the FBI.
6. Trump asks Comey for “loyalty”
On Jan. 27, President Trump arranges a dinner with then-FBI director James Comey, where, according to Comey’s testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, the president says: “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.”
It was uncomfortable, Comey said.
“I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed,” Comey said. “We simply looked at each other in silence. The conversation then moved on, but he returned to the subject near the end of our dinner.”
Comey said he felt like the dinner was an effort on the part of the president to have him ask for his job and “create some sort of patronage relationship.”
7. Flynn is fired …
On Feb. 13, Trump fires Flynn, after leaks reveal that Flynn did in fact talk about sanctions with the Russian ambassador. Flynn continues to deny the accusations, as close as four days before he is fired.
8. … and Trump wonders aloud if Comey can let Flynn go
On Feb. 14, Comey comes to the Oval Office for a counterterrorism meeting, and Trump asks him to stick around afterward for a one-on-one meeting.
“When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the president began by saying, ‘I want to talk about Mike Flynn,’ ” Comey testified in June. “He then said, ‘I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.’ “
Comey agrees Flynn is a “good guy,” but says he would not agree to let it go.
9. Trump fires Comey
On May 9, Trump fires Comey, saying in an interview two days later that the FBI director was a “showboat” and a “grandstander.”
Trump also mentions the FBI’s Russia investigation, which Comey was leading — “this Russia thing,” as Trump calls it.
Discussion in Washington broadens from the question of potential collusion between the Trump camp and the Russian attack on the election to the question of obstruction of justice. Did the president try to get rid of the FBI director to keep him from finding out something Trump wanted to keep hidden? Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein responds by appointing former FBI Director Robert Mueller to serve as a special counsel in the case.
10. Flynn pleads guilty, agrees to cooperate
On Nov. 30, Flynn signs a plea agreement with Mueller in which he acknowledges lying to the FBI about his sanctions conversation. On Dec. 1, Flynn appears in court and his deal becomes public.
The deal delivers to Mueller a witness who spent nearly all the 2016 campaign and the presidential transition at Trump’s elbow, one who was involved with many conversations with foreigners, including key Russians. Flynn’s cooperation resets the clock on the Russia imbroglio as he begins debriefing Mueller and his team.
Share and Enjoy
CVS to Buy Aetna for $69 Billion in a Deal That May Reshape the Health Industry
December 4, 2017 by admin
Filed under Lingerie Events
Comments Off
On Sunday, the two companies emphasized their ability to transform CVS’s 10,000 pharmacy and clinic locations into community-based sites of care that would be far less expensive for patients.
“We think of it as creating a new front door to health care in America,” CVS Health’s chief executive, Larry J. Merlo, said in an interview.
The merger would establish a new way of delivering care, with nurses, pharmacists and others available to counsel people about their diabetes or do the lab work necessary to diagnose a condition, Mr. Merlo said. “We know we can make health care more affordable and less expensive.”
Mark T. Bertolini, Aetna’s chief executive, said that by using CVS’s locations, the company can provide people with a better way of accessing medical care.
Credit
Mario Anzuoni/Reuters
“It’s in their community. It’s in their home,” he said. He added, “CVS has the draw. People trust their pharmacist.”
It is the development of community-based clinics — capable of delivering care with the technology and health information available from both parties — that could prove to be the biggest change brought about the deal.
The hope would be that consumers would not only be able to see savings by going to a retail store to treat a sore throat but also have better oversight of a chronic illness, such as diabetes or heart disease. They could get advice on how to lose weight, or undergo tests to monitor their health.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
“If they can drive the adoption of the care delivery model, that’s a big deal,” said Ana Gupte, a senior health care analyst for Leerink Partners.
The merger agreement came as another factor weighs on the minds of all in the health care industry: Amazon, which has been rumored to be preparing for an entry into the pharmacy business. Jeff Bezos, the Amazon chief executive, and his e-commerce juggernaut have already overturned many industries: book buying, retail shopping, groceries and Hollywood, using fierce customer loyalty and enormous reach as cudgels against incumbent players.
But CVS and Aetna have had a business partnership dating back seven years, and have steadily converged into similar visions of how the health care industry was evolving. Conversations about a deeper bond eventually crystallized into deal talks within the last two months, according to a person with direct knowledge of the discussions.
Although neither chief executive mentioned Amazon by name, both said that what they were creating was a compelling opportunity in and of itself.
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
Thank you for subscribing.
An error has occurred. Please try again later.
You are already subscribed to this email.
“Chasing our competitors has never been a solution,” Mr. Bertolini said. He added, “Our competitors will do what they do.”
Many companies are seeking shelter in the arms of their former adversaries, with well-known medical groups like the Cleveland Clinic joining with Oscar Health, an insurer. With federal officials blocking traditional mergers — like the megadeal that featured Anthem and Cigna, the nation’s largest insurers, and one involving Aetna and its rival Humana — companies are looking at combinations that take them beyond their traditional lines of business.
Many analysts view the combination of CVS and Aetna as a defensive move by the companies. CVS Health, which also recently signed an agreement with Anthem to help the insurer start its own internal pharmacy benefit manager, is looking to protect its business with Aetna as it fends off rivals like UnitedHealth Group’s OptumRx and others. Aetna, foiled in its attempt to buy Humana, is searching for new ways to expand its business.
Credit
Bill Sikes/Associated Press
The merger could also fundamentally reshape the business of overseeing drug coverage for insurers, an industry that is dominated by three large players and that has increasingly come under scrutiny over the past year as public anger over high drug prices has expanded beyond the usual culprits — most notably the pharmaceutical industry — to lesser-known players like pharmacy benefit managers.
Under the terms of the deal, CVS will pay about $207 a share, based on Friday’s closing prices. Roughly $145 a share of that would be in cash, with the remainder in newly issued CVS stock. The deal is expected to close in the second half of next year, subject to approval by shareholders of both companies as well as regulators.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Antitrust approval has become an interesting question in the Trump administration, which bankers and lawyers had thought would be more tolerant of consolidation than its predecessor.
A combination of a drugstore company and an insurer is considered less problematic than a merger of two players in the same business, which could reduce competition and hurt consumers. Such concerns ultimately sank Aetna’s efforts to buy Humana, and Anthem’s push to buy Cigna, when the Obama administration signaled its opposition to such consolidation.
CVS’s proposed takeover of Aetna is a so-called vertical merger, combining companies in two different industries. But while such deals have traditionally met little opposition in Washington, the Justice Department has sued to block ATT’s $85.4 billion takeover of Time Warner on the grounds that it would create too powerful of a content company.
Both CVS and Aetna played down the prospects of regulators moving to block their deal. The breakup fee for the transaction is not especially large, reflecting that belief.
Mr. Bertolini asserted that the companies would not raise prices for consumers. “It doesn’t make sense for us to charge people more when we want more people in the store,” he said.
But analysts and other merger experts warn that the deal could be blocked by federal antitrust officials who worry that it could lessen competition. One area of focus may be Medicare; both companies are significant players in offering prescription drug plans to Medicare beneficiaries.
While the companies said they want to lower costs, CVS also makes money on rebates from drug makers and on filling prescriptions through its pharmacies.
David A. Balto, an antitrust lawyer who has been sharply critical of combinations among insurers and pharmacy benefit managers, said that he was wary of having retailers in charge of people’s health. He argued that doctors may be in a better position to treat illness than retail executives.
“Who do you want to run the health care system?” he said.
Continue reading the main story