Hmmmm. Let's examine two excerpts here:

First, the predicate:

Quote:

---

Yates also said her decision to notify the White House counsel had been discussed "at great length." According to her testimony: "Certainly leading up to our notification on the 26th, it was a topic of a whole lot of discussion in DOJ and with other members of the intel community."

---

I just bet it was. Questions like: "Do we expose the FISA warrant(s) by going after Flynn?" "Will we get some brownie points with the Trump administration so we can keep our phony baloney jobs for long enough to get Trump"? And likely a few others.

But based on this, I think there was a different type of debate going on:

Quote:

---

This is where it gets very suspect and that the 302's were possibly changed. According to Comey's testimony he didn't think Flynn had intentionally lied, he was just confused about which conversations were being asked about and the fact that there was so much going on at the time he thought Flynn was just confused. And reports are that the other agent felt the same way. But after Comey was fired and Mueller was in place, the 302 prepared by Strzok read something very different. J

---

If Flynn was "confused" about which meetings/conversations were the subject of the questioning then the questions were rambling and imprecise. IOW, insufficient to support a perjury or lying to a federal agent charge. And it's only an omission that is misleading if Flynn was specifically asked about it and he made an affirmative statement, not something like "to the best of my recollection at this moment."

So how to get around that defect? Don't change Flynn's answers in the 302s, change the questions he was asked.

Quote:

---

The FISA-gate, Clinton emails, and Uranium One scandals are sort of reaching a consensus. Many things quite wrong and illegal were done by both Hillary Clinton and her entourage and members of the Obama agencies and administration both the acts themselves and the cover-ups and omissions that ensued.

---

So if it is so clear-cut, will we finally see actual arrests or at the very least, please, a lasting end to political careers--- forced retirements for good to write memoirs?

Quote:

---

So if it is so clear-cut, will we finally see actual arrests or at the very least, please, a lasting end to political careers--- forced retirements for good to write memoirs?

---

Only if there is some type of negotiated "truce" to end the Mueller probe. And such a truce is premature on Trump's side at this point, regardless of his personal desire to remove that cloud.

I have said before that the ground is shifting beneath Mueller's feet. As further revelations come out, a crack forms, then grows into a chasm. Mueller is then on defense, not offense.

Patience.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So if it is so clear-cut, will we finally see actual arrests or at the very least, please, a lasting end to political careers--- forced retirements for good to write memoirs?

---

Only if there is some type of negotiated "truce" to end the Mueller probe. And such a truce is premature on Trump's side at this point, regardless of his personal desire to remove that cloud.

I have said before that the ground is shifting beneath Mueller's feet. As further revelations come out, a crack forms, then grows into a chasm. Mueller is then on defense, not offense.

Patience.

---

To quote hog in more gangsta terms:

Trump doesn't need the investigation to stop. He needs to say, "You work for me now, b!+ch."

At least, I hope that is going on with Ram Rod Rosenstein. That is the only way I can figure the justification of leaving him on.

scottimus said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So if it is so clear-cut, will we finally see actual arrests or at the very least, please, a lasting end to political careers--- forced retirements for good to write memoirs?

---

Only if there is some type of negotiated "truce" to end the Mueller probe. And such a truce is premature on Trump's side at this point, regardless of his personal desire to remove that cloud.

I have said before that the ground is shifting beneath Mueller's feet. As further revelations come out, a crack forms, then grows into a chasm. Mueller is then on defense, not offense.

Patience.

---

To quote hog in more gangsta terms:

Trump doesn't need the investigation to stop. He needs to say, "You work for me now, b!+ch."

At least, I hope that is going on with Ram Rod Rosenstein. That is the only way I can figure the justification of leaving him on.

---

You mean kinda like this meeting:

Interesting....

Did you ever say who was watching this thread

Quote:

---

DNC WAS NEVER "HACKED." Crowdstrike and Perkins Coie were the ONLY ones who SAW THEIR SERVER:

---

Remember when the MSM was breathlessly telling everyone that 17 different intel agencies agreed it was RUSSIA!

Quote:

---

lol. A cat fight between the MSM & the DNC over the dossier, and dragging in CrowdStrike. Popcorn time.

---

Frankly, I would be surprised if those DNC servers still exist. So the DNC will dodge and weave legally until they are forced to admit that.

Then....Hello Congressional hearing!!

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

DNC WAS NEVER "HACKED." Crowdstrike and Perkins Coie were the ONLY ones who SAW THEIR SERVER:

---

Remember when the MSM was breathlessly telling everyone that 17 different intel agencies agreed it was RUSSIA!

---

Especially the Coast Guard...they were ALL OVER IT!!!

That's hilarious

This should be fun to watch

how rich would that be if Buzzfeed is what ends up putting the final nail into the dems?

So buzzfeed is looking for the Dems to help prove the dossier is real? The same dossier our leftist friends are ok that it was used to help obtain a warrant. That's awesome on so many levels.

They always eat their own.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/963852937310060544.html

This just came up and I don't have time to thoroughly look it over, but I know that Aggiehawg is the person to critique it. It sounds important for Flynn. (I have to leave now for several hours.)

drcrinum said:

---

This just came up and I don't have time to thoroughly look it over, but I know that Aggiehawg is the person to critique it. It sounds important for Flynn. (I have to leave now for several hours.)

---

She's not locked up yet. Get back to your post, soldier!

drcrinum said:

---

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-14/buzzfeed-suing-dnc-proof-they-were-hacked

Quote:

---

BuzzFeed Suing DNC For Proof They Were Hacked

BuzzFeed is suing the cash-strapped Democratic National Committee (DNC) to force them to hand over information related to the "Steele Dossier" that might help the news outlet defend itself against a lawsuit lodged by a Russian businessman who was named in the document.

Three separate lawsuits have been launched against BuzzFeed in connection to the January 11, 2017 publication of the dossier, which states that Russian tech executive Aleksej Gubarev used his web hosting companies to hack into the DNC's computer systems.

Quote:

---

The dossier, without substantiation, said Gubarev's U.S.-based global web-hosting companies, XBT and Webzilla, planted digital bugs, transmitted viruses and conducted altering operations against the Democratic Party leadership.
While one key name in the dossier was blackened out by BuzzFeed, Gubarev's was not. He alleges that he was never contacted for comment, suffering reputational harm in the process.

---

As part of their defense, BuzzFeed issued a subpoena to the DNC for information which might help them defend against Gubarev's lawsuit by verifying claims in the dossier - including "digital remnants left by the Russian state operatives," as well as a full version of the hacking report prepared by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.

Since the DNC wouldn't let the FBI look at the server and instead relied on the report prepared by CrowdStrike (founded by Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch - who sits on the very Anti-Russian Atlantic Council along with Evelyn "oops!" Farkas. The AC is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk, who apparently owns the Ukrainian gas company Joe Biden's son is on the board of).

"As part of the discovery process, BuzzFeed is attempting to verify claims in the dossier that relate to the hacking of the DNC," said BuzzFeed spokesman Matt Mittenhal in a statement. "We're asking a federal court to force the DNC to follow the law and allow BuzzFeed to fully defend its First Amendment rights."

Last month, the DNC claimed that providing the requested information would expose the DNC's internal operations and harm the party politically (it's always someone else's fault, no?).

---

lol. A cat fight between the MSM & the DNC over the dossier, and dragging in CrowdStrike. Popcorn time.

---

Wonder if this will also turn up more evidence of the fixing of things against Bernie Sanders by the DNC?

Bobcat06 said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

Last month, the DNC claimed that providing the requested information would expose the DNC's internal operations and harm the party politically.

---

In defense of the DNC, being forced to admit there servers weren't hacked but instead they killed one of their own employees would expose their internal operations and harm the party poltically.

---

That's been criminally swept under the rug...not only Seth Rich's murder but also the lawyer in Florida in DWS district that also was killed.

Obviously the FISA abuses are unprecedented but I really hope there's justice for the scumbags responsible (and not the two MS-13 gang members who were subsequently killed a day or two after they murdered Seth but the ones who hired them).

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/963852937310060544.html

This just came up and I don't have time to thoroughly look it over, but I know that Aggiehawg is the person to critique it. It sounds important for Flynn. (I have to leave now for several hours.)

---

This seems to be the result of the new judge compelling discovery from Mueller.

Wictor is in the middle of a thread on this. Will post when he's done.

titan said:

---

Wonder if this will also turn up more evidence of the fixing of things against Bernie Sanders by the DNC?

---

...or the later fixing of things for Seth Rich. Meaning, if SR can be traced to leaking DNC info, it kills the hacking narrative -and- supports a motive for murder.

friscodick said:

---

That's been criminally swept under the rug...not only Seth Rich's murder but also the lawyer in Florida in DWS district that also was killed.

---

And don't forget Shawn Lucas, the process server. There may be more we're forgetting....people were dropping like flies at that time.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/963864365643411456.html

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/963852937310060544.html

This just came up and I don't have time to thoroughly look it over, but I know that Aggiehawg is the person to critique it. It sounds important for Flynn. (I have to leave now for several hours.)

---

Sounds to me like Mueller is trying to keep that 302 in confidence

Quote:

---

"As part of the discovery process, BuzzFeed is attempting to verify claims in the dossier that relate to the hacking of the DNC," said BuzzFeed spokesman Matt Mittenhal in a statement. "We're asking a federal court to force the DNC to follow the law and allow BuzzFeed to fully defend its First Amendment rights."

---

Maybe if buzzfeed had "attempted to verify claims in the dossier" prior to running with it, they wouldn't be getting sued. The irony of this.

jjeffers1 said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/963852937310060544.html

This just came up and I don't have time to thoroughly look it over, but I know that Aggiehawg is the person to critique it. It sounds important for Flynn. (I have to leave now for several hours.)

---

This seems to be the result of the new judge compelling discovery from Mueller.

---

Yeah, can Roscoe or Hawg un-Lawyer this for me?

Here is the full motion:

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

jjeffers1 said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/963852937310060544.html

This just came up and I don't have time to thoroughly look it over, but I know that Aggiehawg is the person to critique it. It sounds important for Flynn. (I have to leave now for several hours.)

---

This seems to be the result of the new judge compelling discovery from Mueller.

---

Yeah, can Roscoe or Hawg un-Lawyer this for me?

---

He's protecting discovery to keep it sealed or concealed from scrutiny if I am reading that right. Sounds like they don't want that 302 to see the light of day. But I will wait on the expert to give the final on that.... she's likely way more familiar with it at the fed level

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

jjeffers1 said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/963852937310060544.html

This just came up and I don't have time to thoroughly look it over, but I know that Aggiehawg is the person to critique it. It sounds important for Flynn. (I have to leave now for several hours.)

---

This seems to be the result of the new judge compelling discovery from Mueller.

---

Yeah, can Roscoe or Hawg un-Lawyer this for me?

Here is the full motion:

---

Flynn: I want all the underlying docs relevant to the charges against me, including everything that is potentially good for my defense. If Mueller wants to keep anything back on the grounds that it is not good for my defense, he has to show the Court and the Court will decide.

Judge: Mueller, you have to give Flynn everything he wants.

Mueller: OK, but what we give him is just used for his defense (i.e. only Mueller, Flynn and his lawyers and the Judge get to see it), and Flynn should not be able to disclose it to anyone else (i.e. the press, the public, etc.)

Flynn: Deal.