DOJ Appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel - Jerome Corsi Rejects Plea Deal

[SoCal Deek]

19 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I am not sure what you are arguing here. None of these things we are discussing are insignificant and they all contribute to eventually determining who had culpability and to what degree. Why would you eliminate one avenue of investigation when it could lead you to where you ultimately want to get?

I’m ‘arguing’ that you’re be distracted by little things and small bad actors that are already known. And my fear is that if Durham doesn’t hurry, this is all going to stop at a Peter Stunk. If Biden wins in November this investigation ends there and the real corruption is forever buried. 

[billsfan1959]

10 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m ‘arguing’ that you’re be distracted by little things and small bad actors that are already known. And my fear is that if Durham doesn’t hurry, this is all going to stop at a Peter Stunk. If Biden wins in November this investigation ends there and the real corruption is forever buried. 

 

Overall, we are on the same side on this. However, I'm sorry, but what the FBI did to Flynn is no "little thing" and didn't involve "small bad actors." 

 

So, we can just agree to disagree on this issue 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

 

Overall, we are on the same side on this. However, I'm sorry, but what the FBI did to Flynn is no "little thing" and didn't involve "small bad actors." 

 

So, we can just agree to disagree on this issue 

You seem to think I’m arguing with you. I’m not. We agree. My concern is that if the Swamp is allowed to circle the wagons around some lower level players, they’ll throw them overboard and try to convince America that this coup was just some shenanigans but nothing more than that. I believe it went way higher than that. 

[B-Man]

ROGER KIMBALL: John Brennan and the Plot to Subvert an American Election.

You remember John Brennan. He was Barack Obama’s director of the CIA. Once upon a time, he was an enthusiast for Gus Hall, the Communist candidate for president, for whom he voted in 1976. I can’t think of any better background for the head of the country’s premier intelligence service under Obama. In 2014, having put childish things behind him as St. Paul advised, Brennan spied on the Senate Intelligence Committee. He denied it indignantly. “Nothing could be further from the truth. We wouldn’t do that. That’s just beyond the scope of reason in terms of what we’d do.”

 

But that was before irrefutable evidence of the CIA’s spying transpired. Then Brennan apologized, sort of. Senators were outraged. They shook their little fists. “What did he know? When did he know it? What did he order?” asked one of the Lilliputians.

 

Guess what happened to John Brennan for spying on the Senate Intelligence Committee?

 

If you said “Nothing,” go to the head of the class and collect your gold star.

 

Nothing happened to Brennan for spying on U.S. senators.

 

If he could get away with that, what else could he get away with?

 

How about starting the bogus investigation into fictional “collusion” or “coordination” between the Russians and the campaign, and then the administration, of Donald Trump? How about that?

 

 

How about that indeed?

 

 

 

 

[Hedge]

 

 

 

[MILFHUNTER#518]

1 minute ago, Hedge said:

 

 

 

He wouldn't say these things unless he knew it was true, which means there are probably indictments inbound. 

[Nanker]

3 hours ago, GG said:

And how do you propose you get to the higher levels without following the evidence that starts far below?

 

Is there an Obama letter that says, I did it?

Well, knowing how he likes to take credit whenever he can, the I, me, mine President B O probably did pen a letter claiming that.

[Deranged Rhino]

5 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

My take, FWIW: There is no "original" FD-302 other than the one turned over. Peter Strzok interviewed Flynn on 24 Jan 2017. According to Comey's testimony, Strzok documented the interview in a draft FD-302 on the very same day. On 17 Dec 2018, the government turned over two redacted versions of the FD-302. One was dated 15 Feb 2017 and the other was dated 31 May 2017. The government certified that both redacted versions were identical, with the exception that the first version, which was digitally signed and certified in February 2017, inadvertently contained a header labeled “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL.” Once that error was recognized, the header was removed and a corrected version, omitting only the header, was re- signed and re-certified in May 2017. 

 

Whatever iterations the FD-302 went through between 24 Jan 17 and 15 Feb 2017 only existed on Strzok's computer, if they were saved at all. My guess is that Strzok just kept editing the same FD-302 until it contained what he needed and became "official" on or after 15 Feb 2017. The fact that it was still labled as a "Draft" on 15 Feb 17 tells me it was not uploaded into the FBI's Sentinel system (which is a bureau wide database of individual case file information) until after that date. So, this version of the FD-302 is the "original" version.

 

Now, the FBI policy on FD-302's is that they are to be completed (not just a draft) within 5 days. There is a reason for that. The FBI does not record interviews, so the FD-302 is a summary of the interview based on Agent notes and recollections. The longer an Agent waits to complete an FD-302, the greater the chances of inaccuracies, omissions, changes to reflect information outside the interview or biases, etc. The fact that the FD-302 was not completed within 5 days and still in a "draft" status on 15 Feb 2017 tells you that Strzok was continuing to edit it.

 

This version should be suspect just on the above information alone. Add into the equation that the original investigation of Flynn, “Crossfire Razor” came under the umbrella of “Crossfire Hurricane” and was based on the underlying justifications for that investigation. A memorandum, closing Crossfire Razor was placed in the file on 4 Jan 2017 based on no information developed to indicate Flynn had done anything wrong. However, Strzok told the case Agent to keep the case technically open - even though the case Agent had determined there was no basis to continue the investigation. Texts between Strzok and Page confirm they kept the case open when it should have been closed. This is important because everything that subsequently occurred with Flyn was done under the authorization of this investigation. Strzok would have had to obtain new authorization to open a new intelligence investigation or a new criminal investigation. He didn't have the basis for either, so he kept the Crossfire Razor intel case open - even though there was no basis to do so.

 

I won't go into everything else Strzok did to create serious questions as to his credibility (he has none and should be criminally prosecuted for what he did). However, eventually, the guilty plea Flynn entered was for "false statements" based entirely off Strzok's summary of the interview in that FD-302 (that he kept editing for over three weeks), and the "false statements" Flynn allegedly told were (1) material to an investigation of which there was no basis for being open and (2) reasonably likely to influence the course of an investigation that shouldn't have even existed (not to mention the FBI had the actual transcripts of Flynn's calls with the Russian Ambassador - so any version Flynn told wasn't going to influence anything they did).

 

This entire thing was a f*****g joke.

 

Edit: Joe Pientka and Peter Strzok interviewed Flynn. Actually Pientka was the one who did the first draft. Strzok and Page then "edited" the draft from 10 Feb 2017 - 15 Feb 2017.

 

 

Good stuff, appreciated  

 

Just adding a bit of detail to what you laid out which was excellent: 

 

My understanding, as a non-Bureau type, is that the Pientka wrote the original 302 (as you note) and likely did so into Sentinel. Strzok was SIAC, and he briefed Comey the day of the interview. Since he was SIAC, he didn't have anyone above him demanding/reminding him to submit the 302 within the 5 day limit (he wasn't going to get written up by anyone for not doing it on time since he was the boss) -- so the delay was "unnoticed" for weeks and weeks, allowing Strzok the opportunity to edit and change with or without even Pietnka's knowledge. 

 

Pietnka transferred to SF after this whole ordeal started to go south for the coup plotters. I'm not 100% certain he's been questioned by Durham or Huber or anyone attached to the various US Attorney investigations, but his memory/notes should be enough to paint clear differences between the "final" 302 and his original even if the original no longer exists on Sentinel or any other location. 

[njbuff]

They say Ed Oliver had Russian whiskey on his breath. 

 

Is he in on the conspiracy?

 

?

[billsfan1959]

9 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Good stuff, appreciated  

 

Just adding a bit of detail to what you laid out which was excellent: 

 

My understanding, as a non-Bureau type, is that the Pientka wrote the original 302 (as you note) and likely did so into Sentinel. Strzok was SIAC, and he briefed Comey the day of the interview. Since he was SIAC, he didn't have anyone above him demanding/reminding him to submit the 302 within the 5 day limit (he wasn't going to get written up by anyone for not doing it on time since he was the boss) -- so the delay was "unnoticed" for weeks and weeks, allowing Strzok the opportunity to edit and change with or without even Pietnka's knowledge. 

 

Pietnka transferred to SF after this whole ordeal started to go south for the coup plotters. I'm not 100% certain he's been questioned by Durham or Huber or anyone attached to the various US Attorney investigations, but his memory/notes should be enough to paint clear differences between the "final" 302 and his original even if the original no longer exists on Sentinel or any other location. 

 

Yeah, so Pintka did write the original draft on the day of the interview; however, I doubt it was uploaded into Sentinel at that time. Strzok would have been the one to brief Comey and also would have gotten the draft FD-302 from Pientka. You are right, there wouldn't have been any pressure for the FD-302 to be completed within the 5 day limit.

 

There are texts between Strzok and Page on 10 Feb 2019 in which they discuss the FD-302. Strzok sent it to her for her review and edits and she chastises him for the quality of the writing. Strzok responds, "Lisa, you didnt see it before my edits that went into what I sent you. I was 1) trying to not to completely re-write the thing so as to save (redacted - probably Pientka's name) voice and 2) get it out to you for general review and comment in anticipation of needing it soon. I greatly appreciate your time in reviewing and your edits. I incorporated them. Thank you

 

Now, Strzok shouldn't have been making major edits to this document almost 3 weeks later, and Page, who was not even in the interview, should not have been making any edits at all. Page was a counsel and her role was to answer legal questions, provide legal advice on Bureau related matters, etc. Strzok was not an attorney.

 

What all of this says to me is that Strzok did, in fact, almost completely rewrite Pientka's draft and needed Page's assistance to make sure that what he put into the FD-302 met the legal requirements needed to charge Flynn with providing false statements. Pientka did drop off the radar after his transfer and It will be interesting to see if he ever was interviewed.

 

 

[Magox]

Glenn Greenwald takes a dive into this mess.

 

 

 

[Magox]

@Deranged Rhino what does all this imply?

 

 

 

 

[Magox]

And this.  I get confused with the timelines and what this all means.  
 

 

 

[Warren Zevon]

[Deranged Rhino]

3 hours ago, Magox said:

@Deranged Rhino what does all this imply?

 

 

 

 

These two show that Comey committed perjury to the House. He testified they kept Razor open only after learning about the call (which was on the 24th) — but we know from these documents the decision to keep Razor open came nearly three weeks sooner on the 4th. 
 

This fact pattern lends strength to the case that the Kislyak call and meeting (and most importantly the felony leak to the Washington Post of the call) were part of a set up. They kept Razor open, but needed to invent a crime to justify it after Trump is sworn in. 
 

This is sedition. That’s where this ends. 

2 hours ago, Magox said:

And this.  I get confused with the timelines and what this all means.  
 

 

 

This is about the 302 discussion had earlier today and last night in this thread. It shows that Strzok was editing the 302 for nearly three weeks before it became what it is now. That lends more strength to the above as well. He was crafting the 302 (we know this from texts between him and Page too) to make sure it would be enough to pass the threshold needed to keep Flynn a part of CrossfireHurricane after the transition. 

[billsfan1959]

9 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

These two show that Comey committed perjury to the House. He testified they kept Razor open only after learning about the call (which was on the 24th) — but we know from these documents the decision to keep Razor open came nearly three weeks sooner on the 4th. 
 

This fact pattern lends strength to the case that the Kislyak call and meeting (and most importantly the felony leak to the Washington Post of the call) were part of a set up. They kept Razor open, but needed to invent a crime to justify it after Trump is sworn in. 
 

This is sedition. That’s where this ends. 

This is about the 302 discussion had earlier today and last night in this thread. It shows that Strzok was editing the 302 for nearly three weeks before it became what it is now. That lends more strength to the above as well. He was crafting the 302 (we know this from texts between him and Page too) to make sure it would be enough to pass the threshold needed to keep Flynn a part of CrossfireHurricane after the transition. 

 

Always good stuff DR. Just to add for @Magox and others:

 

1) It was clearly stated in the closing memorandum, dated 4 Jan 2017, that the investigation (Crossfire Razor) had not disclosed any information indicating Flynn had done anything wrong, that he was "no longer a viable candidate as part of the larger CROSSFIRE HURRICANE umbrella case," and that they had no information "on which to predicate further investigative effort." There was nothing there and nothing to justify keeping it open. Strzok clearly found out the case was being closed and requested, on the same day the closing memo was placed in the file, that it be kept open, and he enlisted Page's help to keep it open. This allowed Strzok to continue to do whatever he wanted, with regard to Flynn, without having to provide justification to reopen the intelligence case or open a new criminal case.

 

2) The interview of Flynn on 24 Jan 2017 was clearly designed to trap him in a lie in order to create a chargeable offense.

      - The basis of the interview was to question Flynn about conversations he had with the Russion Ambassador. The FBI had the transcripts from those interviews and knew there was nothing in them to charge Flynn with any criminal offense - or that is the route they would have taken.

     - In Strzok's hand written notes preparing for the interview, he wrote, "What's our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?" There had already been in-house discussions and discussions with DOJ in which they determined there was no prosecutable case for a Logan Act violation. 

    - If the FBI truly believed Flynn had done anything wrong in those conversations they would have confronted Flynn with irrefutable evidence in the transcripts. Again, Strzok admits as much in his preparation notes, "We regularly show subjects evidence with the goal of getting them to admit their wrongdoing." However, there was no evidence of wrongdoing.

    - The only thing they could do is exactly what Strzok set out to do: Trap Flynn in a lie.

    - To do so,  the FBI ignored direction from the DOJ and his own in-house legal counsel in following standard protocol and arranging an interview through White House channels. This was because they wanted Flynn to be unprepared for the interview.

    - There is a requirement for Agents to inform subjects that it is a criminal offense to provide a false statement during the interview. Strzok requested and got clarification from Page that he didn't have to notify Flynn until after he got Flynn to lie. In this same email, Strzok admitted to Page that he had actually never charged anyone with making a false statement to him while with the FBI (because it is rare).

    - Flynn had literally engaged in hundreds of conversations with people and was being asked to recall details of several short conversations from a month earlier, without being given any time to think about those conversations prior to the interview and without reviewing the transcripts

    - Even so, Strzok informed Comey, on the day of the interview, that neither Strzok or Pientka (the other Agent in the interview) believed Flynn had lied. Pientka also drafted a summary of the interview on an FD-302 on 24 Jan 2017. We do not know if there is a copy of this draft; however, we do know that Strzok and Page made major edits to the FD-302 almost 3 weeks later and, in this version, indicated Flynn had lied.

   - Strzok was not the Case Agent on Crossfire Razor and there are texts indicating Strzok was not initially going to be involved in the interview. Yet somehow, this guy with literally hundreds upon hundreds of texts between him and Page demonstrating his hatred of Trump and anything related to Trump managed to keep the case open, insert himself into the case and into this interview, and write the final FD-302 version with Flynn's "lies."

 

Edited May 18, 2020 by billsfan1959

[B-Man]

Here’s What That IG Fired by Trump Was ‘Investigating’ Mike Pompeo Over

Last Friday, the Trump administration moved ahead with offering Congress the required 30 day notice for the removal of State Department Inspector General Steve Linick.

While this set hair on fire among the left and the press, the real story was much more mundane (see Teeth Are Gnashed After Trump Fires State Department IG, Here’s the Real Story). Linick was a partisan, appointed by Obama, who was under investigation for mishandling classified information. He had also let the mask slip during the Trump impeachment, attempting to pass along documents to feed a partisan narrative. In the end, even Democrats agreed nothing he had was relevant and that his gambit made no sense.

 

Regardless, one of the ways Linick’s firing is being spun as scandalous, including by Sen. Mitt Romney (because of course), is that Linick was supposedly “investigating” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Now, we know what he was looking into.

 

 

What this is called is a weak attempt to protect one’s self by starting a counter investigation. Linick was being looked into for wrongdoing going back to 2019. When it became clear he was going to be fired, he started “investigating” Mike Pompeo, which would obviously complicate his ousting. How could he be fired as a watchdog if he was looking into the person pushing to fire him? Even still, this is an especially pathetic attempt to cover his backside.

 

One of the dumbest aspects of the Trump era has been seeing things that were perfectly normal under past administrations turned into scandal. The idea that no one in the Obama administration ever had a staffer make a phone call for them or run an errand is laughable. There’s a reason none of this stuff was ever pursued prior to Trump. Namely, because it’s ridiculous. Having a government IG spend taxpayer money to investigate whether a staffer walked a dog is incredibly wasteful.

 

More at the link: https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2020/05/18/heres-what-that-fired-ig-was-investigating-mike-pompeo-over/

 

 

 

 

[BillStime]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Here’s What That IG Fired by Trump Was ‘Investigating’ Mike Pompeo Over

Last Friday, the Trump administration moved ahead with offering Congress the required 30 day notice for the removal of State Department Inspector General Steve Linick.

While this set hair on fire among the left and the press, the real story was much more mundane (see Teeth Are Gnashed After Trump Fires State Department IG, Here’s the Real Story). Linick was a partisan, appointed by Obama, who was under investigation for mishandling classified information. He had also let the mask slip during the Trump impeachment, attempting to pass along documents to feed a partisan narrative. In the end, even Democrats agreed nothing he had was relevant and that his gambit made no sense.

 

Regardless, one of the ways Linick’s firing is being spun as scandalous, including by Sen. Mitt Romney (because of course), is that Linick was supposedly “investigating” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Now, we know what he was looking into.

 

 

What this is called is a weak attempt to protect one’s self by starting a counter investigation. Linick was being looked into for wrongdoing going back to 2019. When it became clear he was going to be fired, he started “investigating” Mike Pompeo, which would obviously complicate his ousting. How could he be fired as a watchdog if he was looking into the person pushing to fire him? Even still, this is an especially pathetic attempt to cover his backside.

 

One of the dumbest aspects of the Trump era has been seeing things that were perfectly normal under past administrations turned into scandal. The idea that no one in the Obama administration ever had a staffer make a phone call for them or run an errand is laughable. There’s a reason none of this stuff was ever pursued prior to Trump. Namely, because it’s ridiculous. Having a government IG spend taxpayer money to investigate whether a staffer walked a dog is incredibly wasteful.

 

More at the link: https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2020/05/18/heres-what-that-fired-ig-was-investigating-mike-pompeo-over/

 

 

 

 

 

Brought to us by...

REDSTATE.COM

 

 

 

 

 

 

[B-Man]

 

[BillStime]

Hmmm I wonder why ???

 

Barr says he does not expect Obama or Biden will be investigated by prosecutor reviewing 2016 Russia probe