'Stolen or destroyed?': Trump seeks 'missing' FBI document on Flynn interview

  
Via:  texan1211  •  2 weeks ago  •  33 comments

By:   Caitlin Yilek (MSN)

'Stolen or destroyed?': Trump seeks 'missing' FBI document on Flynn interview
President Trump claimed the FBI document detailing its interview with Michael Flynn, his former national security adviser, is missing.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


President Trump claimed the FBI document detailing its interview with Michael Flynn, his former national security adviser, is missing.

© Provided by Washington Examiner

"Where is the 302?" the president asked late Thursday in a tweet, referring to the FBI's form used to summarize its interviews with witnesses. "It is missing. Was it stolen or destroyed?"


Where is the 302? It is missing. Was it stolen or destroyed? General Flynn is being persecuted! #OBAMAGATE
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 15, 2020

Last week, Rep. Devin Nunes, a Trump ally and the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo that the FBI's original 302 interview summary "is still missing."

The California Republican said top FBI officials and other sources told lawmakers behind closed doors that the bureau did not believe Flynn lied when interviewed by two agents on Jan. 24, 2017. Nunes said he was shocked to learn later about leaks to the media saying Flynn was "being busted" for lying about his contacts with a Russian envoy during the presidential transition period.

Flynn, who cooperated in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his conversations with a Russian diplomat. He later declared his innocence and argued he was set up by the FBI.

"Then that means that the FBI had lied to us," Nunes said. "The original report that was used to brief the United States Congress, that report is missing. It's gone. Poof. We can't find it."

Late last year, Flynn's lawyers alleged FBI agents doctored the 302, but federal prosecutors denied that the notes had been changed in any significant way.

The Justice Department filed to dismiss charges against Flynn. The judge presiding over the case invited outside opinions on Tuesday and appointed a retired judge on Wednesday to argue whether Flynn should be held in contempt for perjury.

Read More


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Texan1211
1  seeder  Texan1211    2 weeks ago

So, FBI, WHERE IS THE ORIGINAL?

 
 
 
Heartland American
1.1  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @1    2 weeks ago

Good question and here’s the answer....😂

#Obamagate – A.F. Branco Cartoon"> 03-law-risk-li-600-1200x630-300x160.jpghttps://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/03-law-risk-li-600-1200x630-125x66.jpg 125w, https://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/03-law-risk-li-600-1200x630-620x330.jpg 620w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" >

Obama seems worried about the DOJ dropping the Flynn case, is that because of what scandals it will reveal in his own administration? Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.2  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @1    2 weeks ago

Probably in the same safe place where Tara Reades Senate complaint is.

And pictures of the Abominable Snowman...

 
 
 
squiggy
1.2.1  squiggy  replied to  Split Personality @1.2    2 weeks ago

The Obominable Snowjob has never been seen at the University of Delaware

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.3  1stwarrior  replied to  Texan1211 @1    2 weeks ago

Wonder where the Mueller Team "misplaced" it?

 
 
 
Dulay
1.3.1  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1.3    2 weeks ago
Wonder where the Mueller Team "misplaced" it?

Since Flynn was interviewed 3 MONTHS before Mueller was appointed, WHY are you wondering that? 

 
 
 
Heartland American
1.3.2  Heartland American  replied to  Dulay @1.3.1    2 weeks ago

That’s the point.  Since the interview already happened Mueller would have had the notes of that for his own investigation.  So, what did he and his staff do with the FBI notes of that interview? 

 
 
 
Thomas
1.3.3  Thomas  replied to  1stwarrior @1.3    2 weeks ago

Classified and In (Deleted)'s hidey hole with the rest of his "perfect" phone conversations.

 
 
 
Ronin2
1.3.4  Ronin2  replied to  Thomas @1.3.3    2 weeks ago

More likely a conversation piece on Barack Obama's coffee table. That is where all needed investigative materials end up. In Democratic President's homes.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Texan1211 @1    2 weeks ago

Amazing and unprecedented that the 302  was first essentially entirely rewritten first  by Peter Strozek and then by his mistress who was neither an agent nor attended the interview.   Funny business from the get go. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.4.1  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.4    2 weeks ago

I'm not a lawyer, but isn't that all hearsay from conspiracy sites?

 Funny business from the get go. 

I am not a Shrink, but I have a lot of experience with Shrink Wrap....

 
 
 
Ronin2
1.4.2  Ronin2  replied to  Split Personality @1.4.1    2 weeks ago

Funny that Lisa Page admitted to altering the 302 (which is illegal).  Also that the FBI made multiple drafts of the 302 (which is not standard procedure).

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/497064-why-dismiss-the-flynn-case-because-the-fbi-cant-prove-it

In order to promote the accuracy of FBI “302s,” those reports are supposed to be completed within five days of the interview. Usually, one agent is the main interrogator, another takes notes; one of the two is responsible for drafting the 302, which the two agents then finalize, making sure — between their memories and any notes taken — that the 302 accurately reflects the interviewee’s statements.

The   Flynn 302   went through   multiple drafts , and the FBI has not produced the earliest iterations. If agents are just faithfully rendering a witness’s account, that should never call for heavy editing. Yet, the Flynn 302 was still being edited on Feb. 10, 17 days after the interview. And, we know from text messages, it was being edited by Lisa Page, then an FBI lawyer working as counsel to then-Deputy Director   Andrew McCabe . Page was neither an agent nor present at the Flynn interview; she had no business editing what Flynn said. In the contemporaneous texts, Page lambasts Strzok for so shoddy a rendition; Strzok says Page should have seen how bad was the version Pientka gave him, which Strzok labored mightily to fix before passing it along to Page. Strzok also planned to make final edits after Page was done. The 302, which apparently also was reviewed by even higher-ranking officials, was not finalized until Feb. 15.

In weirdness that signaled trouble, the FBI refused to disclose the 302 to Flynn’s defense. When pressed by the court, the FBI eventually produced a 302, not of Flynn’s interview, but of Strzok’s “exit interview” — when he was being terminated — which purported to summarize Flynn’s interview. This raised more questions. Finally, the FBI produced not one but two Flynn 302s: the first labeled a “deliberative” document (clearly, because Flynn’s statements were extensively edited); the second generated later, when the FBI realized it had mistakenly left the “deliberative” label on the first. (The two 302s are the same, except for the label.)

Again, the texts elucidate that there must be earlier versions — Pientka’s first draft, Strzok’s alterations of it, Page’s alterations of Strzok’s draft, etc. These versions have never been disclosed, and who knows whether they still exist?

As if that were not bad enough, there are problems with the agents’ handwritten notes. There are two sets of notes, one from each agent. Only a few weeks ago, prosecutors finally conceded that they’d misrepresented to the court and the defense which agent was the author of which set. There is, in addition, reason to suspect Strzok was not being forthright when, in his exit interview, he described Pientka as primarily responsible for writing the 302.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5633260/12-17-18-Redacted-Flynn-Interview-302.pdf

So the Hill is a conspiracy site? Oh, and from the article the two 302's the FBI produced for the prosecution is linked right from the article. Neither is the original- of course the FBI claims there were two original 302's. They can't produce either one.

Oh, you and the TDS suffers that don't give a damn about standard procedure or rule of law will be happy to know that the judge in the Flynn case has violated his own precedence by appointing a new outside prosecutor and is trying to get Flynn for perjury and contempt. Time for a fucking mistrial due to judicial bias.

https://www.npr.org/2020/05/13/855788528/court-appoints-retired-judge-to-oppose-justice-department-in-michael-flynn-case

The presiding judge in Michael Flynn's criminal case has appointed a retired judge to present arguments in opposition to the Justice Department's move to dismiss its prosecution of the former national security adviser.

Judge Emmet Sullivan has asked John Gleeson, a retired judge in the Eastern District of New York, to act as a friend of the court and look into whether Flynn should face a contempt hearing for perjury.

The order does not address the government's attempt to drop the case or suggest when the judge might make that decision. It comes a day after Sullivan issued an order soliciting "friend of the court" briefs and said he would provide a schedule at a later time.

The move signals the judge could have some reservations about the DOJ's effort to dismiss the case.

The Justice Department announced last week that it would move to drop the case against Flynn. Attorney General William Barr has drawn criticism for intervening in cases involving friends of President Trump.

Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians, but now says that he's innocent and was entrapped by the government.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/13/michael-flynn-judge-emmet-sullivan-trump-adviser-case/5187867002/

Gleeson, who recently criticized the Justice Department's handling of Flynn's case , will also examine whether the parties should be forced to persuade Sullivan that the former adviser to President Donald Trump should not be held in contempt for perjury.

Gleeson's appointment is the first clear indication that Sullivan is considering punishing Flynn for pleading guilty and then reversing course. The retired judge was appointed just a day after Sullivan delayed ruling on the government's request to drop Flynn's case. Sullivan on Tuesday said he will allow outside parties to challenge the government's position.

The possibility of a contempt charge injects more drama into an already prolonged criminal case. Flynn first pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI in 2017 about his communications with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and came close to punishment in 2018.

The judge is nothing more than a Clinton appointed tool; that reversed course after Obama opened his fat mouth about a case he has illegal ties to.

But Trruuummmmppppp!!!!! This is beyond pathetic

 
 
 
Dulay
1.4.3  Dulay  replied to  Ronin2 @1.4.2    2 weeks ago
So the Hill is a conspiracy site?

BY ANDREW C. MCCARTHY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR 

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL
 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.4.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @1.4.1    2 weeks ago

The documents cam from the Federal government. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2  seeder  Texan1211    2 weeks ago

Okay, show of hands here:

How many folks still think that the FBI has done absolutely nothing wrong re the Flynn trap, and the "investigation" of collusion?

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @2    2 weeks ago
 Funny business from the get go. 

ME,ME,Me,

The man pleaded guilty and accepted a  plea Bargain which included lying to the FBI on multiple occasions, failure to report acting as an agent for a

foreign government which is officially a NATO ally but more often than not acts like a puppet of Russia and multiple other charges including using his son as a shield in some of these charges.

DOJ, considering the 3 star General's service to his country and former service in the Obama Adminiistration, bent over backwards,

tempting the patience of the Judge on more than one occasion to lessen the severity, the charges and the punishment.

Michael Flynn pled guilty, not once but twice to the same charges and plea arrangement.

No wonder the Judge is concerned. Either Flynn is a perjurer or a traitor or both in my humble opinion.

Flynn jumped the gun, could not wait to be an international "player" or at least got caught doing so before the Trump Administration

was sworn in. Period. He had no authority to speak to any foreign dignitary,  or promise any international outcomes. Period.

And he lied about it when they ( NSA &  FBI) already had the taped conversations.

He was toast, remains toast, should take his punishment and be thankful that he still gets a military pension.

jrSmiley_54_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Heartland American
2.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  Split Personality @2.1    2 weeks ago

Brennan, Clapper, and Comey are all apart of the “Crossfire Razor Gang” out to unseat President Trump. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1.2  Ronin2  replied to  Split Personality @2.1    2 weeks ago

Rule of law, and procedure be damned right?

So you will have no problem if the Trump FBI and DOJ does something similar to any Biden campaign officials and future members of the administration?

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.3  Split Personality  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
So you will have no problem if the Trump FBI and DOJ does something similar to any Biden campaign officials and future members of the administration?

If they plead guilty?  Once or twice?  Makes no matter to me.  Innocent people take guilty plea bargains all the time

to stop the hemorrhaging of money and to get back to their lives without waiting years.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.4  XDm9mm  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.3    2 weeks ago
Innocent people take guilty plea bargains all the time

And they also rescind guilty pleas when they find better counsel.

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.5  Split Personality  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.4    2 weeks ago

Only the judge can rescind if he/she finds that the defendant was poorly advised or did not understand the judgement.

The Judge went over this in great detail TWICE and TWICE elicited a verbal and written plea of guilty by General Flynn.  The Judge ACCEPTED that guilty plea TWICE.

Flynn was acting as an official member of the US government a month before Trump was sworn in and was

STILL (secretly) a lobbyists for our strange Russia loving Turkish "allies".

He lied to Pence. He lied to a lot of people.

 
 
 
Tacos!
3  Tacos!    2 weeks ago
the FBI's original 302 interview summary "is still missing."

That's pretty convenient. And, one would think, highly improbable in a non-corrupt scenario.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1  seeder  Texan1211  replied to  Tacos! @3    2 weeks ago
That's pretty convenient. 

Isn't it?

And, one would think, highly improbable in a non-corrupt scenario.

Yes, VERY improbable. I'm sure the FBI twiddled its collective thumbs for 3 weeks before writing up the report that they were SURE was going to accomplish their goal--removal of Flynn. And now, it simply can't be found?

Yeah, right.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @3    2 weeks ago
the FBI's original 302 interview summary "is still missing."

Judge Sullivan addressed this delusional bullshit in his 92 page denial of Flynn's motion for Brady material in December of 2019. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
3.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @3.2    2 weeks ago

No one cares.

 
 
 
Thomas
3.2.2  Thomas  replied to  Dulay @3.2    2 weeks ago
Judge Sullivan addressed this delusional bullshit in his 92 page denial of Flynn's motion for Brady material in December of 2019

to wit:

1.Information that Does Not Exist Request 5—“[t]he Flynn 302 dated January 19, 2017,mentioned in the Mueller Report,” Def.’s Mot., ECF No. 111 at 4— does not exist as the year of 2017 in the relevant portion of the Mueller Report was a typographical error. See Gov’t’s App. A, ECF No. 122-1 at 2 (clarifying that “January 19, 2017” is a typographical error, and that Mr. Flynn’s interview took place on January 19, 2018). Mr. Flynn does not dispute the government’s response. See generally Def.’s Reply, ECF No. 133 at 5-36.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.2.3  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @3.2.1    2 weeks ago
No one cares.

Thank you for your unfounded and uniformed opinion. /s

 
 
 
bbl-1
4  bbl-1    2 weeks ago

The document is in the same 'drawer'  along with the Hawaiian Birther investigators stuff.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1  seeder  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @4    2 weeks ago
The document is in the same 'drawer'  along with the Hawaiian Birther investigators stuff.

So now you think the FBI investigated where Obama was born?

LOL!

 
 
 
bbl-1
4.1.1  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1    2 weeks ago

Holy crackers.  Tony Schwartz is correct. [Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.2  seeder  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @4.1.1    2 weeks ago
Holy crackers.  Tony Schwartz is correct. ( deleted)

WTF are you going on about now?

 
 
 
bbl-1
4.1.3  bbl-1  replied to  bbl-1 @4.1.1    one week ago

Deleted?  Sweeping Generalization?  Don't think so.  4.1 and 4.1.2 exudes the 'pardon me but I think your slip is showing' in absolute spades.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Tacos!


21 visitors