will25u said:

---

Something for a while has been nagging at me in regards to Wray....

President Trump is not shy about firing someone. And there is nothing(that I see) holding President Trump back from firing Wray. I think the reason it took so long to fire Comey was because of how it would look. But unless I am missing something, there shouldn't be anything holding President Trump back from firing Wray.

So why has he not done it? If he is undermining things in the background, why not get rid of him?

It is a little perplexing to me.

---

Perhaps Wray is a cooperating witness.

My rule of thumb is if I catch myself thinking "why doesn't Trump know this already," I stop, ask myself if it's reasonable to think that I would know more about a given person in DC than Trump, his cabinet, or his admin.

I make it a habit to never trust leaders implicitly, but when it comes to hiring/firing, I'm not second-guessing Trump any longer.

whatthehey78 said:

---

Soooooo many facts, so much detail, reams of data proving Deep State corruption and SOOOOOOOO little action!

Will the Dam ever break?

---

Why would they?

Supposedly (according to a survey from last weekend), 50% to 60% of Americans believe the dossier is either completely authentic,, or at least partially true.

So no, they won't, and the Republicans don't have the PR facilities like the Dems do.

I don't think so. Wray was more likely left in place to cover the tracks of Comey and Mueller. He seems to be working hard to do just that.

sidney retweeted this.

Quote:

---

Newly released records show that a senior Pentagon official engaged in regular conversations with The Washington Post's David Ignatius, the columnist who put his mark on the Trump-Russia affair by disclosing top secret intercepted telephone calls by retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

---

will25u said:

---

Something for a while has been nagging at me in regards to Wray....

President Trump is not shy about firing someone. And there is nothing(that I see) holding President Trump back from firing Wray. I think the reason it took so long to fire Comey was because of how it would look. But unless I am missing something, there shouldn't be anything holding President Trump back from firing Wray.

So why has he not done it? If he is undermining things in the background, why not get rid of him?

It is a little perplexing to me.

---

One minute after he fires Wray, Schiff will be filing new articles of impeachment for obstruction (even though Trump would be justified).

He's gotta let Barr take care of this. Remember Trump already authorized declassification of everything and gave permission to Barr to release.

will25u said:

---

Something for a while has been nagging at me in regards to Wray....

President Trump is not shy about firing someone. And there is nothing(that I see) holding President Trump back from firing Wray. I think the reason it took so long to fire Comey was because of how it would look. But unless I am missing something, there shouldn't be anything holding President Trump back from firing Wray.

So why has he not done it? If he is undermining things in the background, why not get rid of him?

It is a little perplexing to me.

---

I think it's vital to have someone like Barr at the head of the FBI right now.

JJMt said:

---

Sorry if it's already been posted in this thread, but I have yet to see exactly what Flynn supposedly told the FBI agents about his conversations with the Russian ambassador and exactly what Flynn actually did say to the Russian ambassador.

Does anyone know?

The FBI changed the 302 to make Flynn a liar. What were the exact changes?

---

We don't know. Pientka's original 302 has never been provided to the defense. FBI says they can't find it.

But for all of the kvetching back and forth between Strzok and Page about both of them doing the edits but hide them to still sound like Pientka wrote it, means it went through several iterations and that was before McCabe got a hold of it to do his own edits.

But from what I have gleaned, the issue was the discussions of sanctions Obama had placed on the Russians. Flynn stated he didn't recall the specifics of what was said. I have also seen it reported that Flynn kind of joked with the agents saying something to the effect of, "You guys probably know what was said," meaning he knew the call was likely intercepted and transcribed.

Which brings me to another point, the transcript of the call. I've never seen that the transcript was provided to Flynn's defense team, either before or after his guilty plea. But not to put too fine a point on it, the case manager for Crossfire Razor (Flynn investigation opened on August 16th, 2016) most likely had read it and still recommended closing that case on January 4, 2017. Twenty minutes later Strzok intervened to keep it open, using the "7th floor" (Comey's office) as the origin of the direction to keep it open.

The next day was White House meeting memorialized in the Susan Rice email to herself. And Biden was there for the briefing about the Flynn case and the Steele Dossier. (Flynn was mentioned by name in the dossier.)

TexAgs91 said:

---

will25u said:

---

Something for a while has been nagging at me in regards to Wray....

President Trump is not shy about firing someone. And there is nothing(that I see) holding President Trump back from firing Wray. I think the reason it took so long to fire Comey was because of how it would look. But unless I am missing something, there shouldn't be anything holding President Trump back from firing Wray.

So why has he not done it? If he is undermining things in the background, why not get rid of him?

It is a little perplexing to me.

---

I think it's vital to have someone like Barr at the head of the FBI right now.

---

DOJ but point is the same. Trump is letting Barr take care of Wray. Even with Comey technically Trump didn't move on firing him until he got the official recommendation from Rosenstein and STILL they used it against him. I agree Trump will wait until after the election unless Wray goes really rogue.

JJMt said:

---

Sorry if it's already been posted in this thread, but I have yet to see exactly what Flynn supposedly told the FBI agents about his conversations with the Russian ambassador and exactly what Flynn actually did say to the Russian ambassador.

Does anyone know?

The FBI changed the 302 to make Flynn a liar. What were the exact changes?

---

Hard to tell, being the FBI has previously indicated that they "lost" the original 302...**

Unless you have a copy?

Please let us know...Inquiring minds want to know!




** This, in an organization that requires, by process, procedure, code and regulations that they maintain manual and electronic backup of all such documents, mostly on duplicated/backup servers as well...

aggiehawg said:

---

Office of Net Assessment needs to be shut down. Just a way for people who think they are really important to get paid huge sums of money to navel gaze and circle jerk each other.

---

I think that is actually on their letterhead.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/04/your-guide-to-the-obama-administrations-hit-on-michael-flynn/

Good wrap up of everything General Flynn. By Margot Cleveland.

drcrinum said:

---

Sessions should never have been appointed AG.

---

Agree. If a doofus like Al Franken could get Sessions so easily confused, he wasn't sharp enough to be AG.

Deep dive article on the motivations for why the FBI set up Flynn by Andy McCarthy. Long story short they knew Flynn was the only inner circle guy for Trump that knew how the Intelligence agencies really worked and that he would have shut down the Crossfire operations because he understood the FBI works for the President and not the other way around. The corruption of the FBI is just staggering.

National Review article

Quote:

---

The answer to the what question has been clear for a long time: The FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn, hoping to lure him into misstatements that the bureau could portray as lies. In the frenzied political climate of the time, that would have been enough to get him removed from his new position as national security adviser (NSA), perhaps even to prosecute him. On that score, the new disclosures, startling as they are to read, just elucidate what was already obvious.

But why did they do it? That has been the baffling question. Oh, there have been plenty of indications that the Obama administration could not abide Flynn. The White House and the intelligence agencies had their reasons, mostly vindictive. But while that may explain their gleefulness over his fall from grace, it has never been a satisfying explanation for the extraordinary measures the FBI took to orchestrate that fall.

---

Quote:

---

But how could the FBI sustain an investigation targeting the president when the president would have the power to shut the investigation down?
The only way the bureau could pull that off would be to conceal from the president the fullness of the Russia investigation in particular, the fact that Trump was the target.

That is why Flynn had to go.

President Trump was a political phenomenon but a novice when it came to governance. He was not supported by the Republican foreign-policy and national-security clerisy, which he had gone out of his way to antagonize in the campaign. The staff he brought into the government consisted mainly of loyalists. There were some skilled advisers, too, but their experience was not in the national-security realm.

The exception was Flynn. The former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency knew how the spy agencies worked. He knew where and how they kept secrets. He had enough scars from tangles with the intelligence bureaucracy that he knew how the game was played how intelligence officials exploited information, or selectively withheld it.

---

Quote:

---

Upon the new president's January 20 inauguration, Flynn was the matter of most immediate urgency to the FBI. That was not because the agents were trying to make a case on him. It was because he was already starting his new job as Trump's NSA.

It was also a frenzied time, with the media and Democrats pushing the collusion narrative, creating an uproar over whether Flynn had discussed anti-Russia sanctions with Ambassador Kislyak. Flynn publicly said the subject did not come up. Vice President Pence publicly backed him. But the FBI had had surveillance coverage on the Russian envoy. The bureau knew the issue of sanctions had been discussed. Though Flynn had said nothing inappropriate on the subject, its mere mention would become a huge political problem.

---

Quote:

---

Most of the press attention has been about the planning for that grilling about how brazenly the bureau spoke of trying to get Flynn to lie, about the renegade scheme to orchestrate an interrogation of Flynn without informing the Trump White House, as protocol required. That's significant, but it misses the bigger picture. The January 2122 emails show that the FBI did not start out with that perjury-trap plan. They ended up with the perjury-trap plan because there was no practical alternative if the bureau was to achieve its objective the withholding of information about Russia from the incoming Trump team, in order to keep the TrumpRussia investigation alive.

---

LOTS of detail within this and it breaks down step by step the process and motivations involved. Makes me sick.

will25u said:

---

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/04/your-guide-to-the-obama-administrations-hit-on-michael-flynn/

Good wrap up of everything General Flynn. By Margot Cleveland.

---

Best writeup to date on latest Flynn revelations.

Stay tuned.

drcrinum said:

---

The Nunes lawsuit document against Fusion GPS is available:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6382462/9-4-19-Nunes-v-Fusion-GPS-Complaint.pdf

Here is an excerpt from the Conclusion:

Quote:

---

CONCLUSION

Fusion GPS, Simpson and Steele fraudulently developed the "Steele Dossier" and disseminated it to U.S. Government officials and the press as if the salacious accusations were true. Plaintiff investigated this wrongdoing, causing Fusion GPS and Simpson to retaliate against him and to take action that was intended to harass, intimidate and influence Plaintiff in the performance of his congressional investigation. That retaliation and obstruction of justice consisted of a coordinated effort by the Defendants to manufacture "ethics" complaints against Plaintiff and to utilize the press (McClatchy) as a weapon to pressure Plaintiff to back off his investigation of Fusion GPS and Simpson. Defendants' corrupt acts of racketeering are part of their regular way of doing business. That way of doing business must end here and now......

---

Here is a thread discussing the suit:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1169389892469755904.html

If Nunes wins this, it will bankrupt Fusion GPS or at least put it out of business.

---

Looks like that won't be happening. The Judge threw out the lawsuit, but said he could refile. The catch is that if he doesn't do it correctly, he'll get sanctioned.
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000170-6a3e-da94-a9f2-fe3e6a8c0000

Here's a great quotes by Sydney:

Quote:

---

The prosecution is only as good as the integrity of the prosecutors.

---

Didn't know there's this website: https://www.creepsonamission.com/

drcrinum said:

---

---

Oooh, the documents will be filed on the public docket, meaning they are not subject to the protective order and Sydney can talk about them.

Popcorn time.

They did a document dump on Saturday?

drcrinum said:

---

Sessions should never have been appointed AG.

---

I've been seeing him interviewed by Fox lately being asked very softball questions - even by people like Tucker. This is THE GUY who could have and should have stopped the Mueller investigation before anyone knew the name Mueller.

Tucker and others should have asked him very direct questions about WTH he was thinking, and not let him give weasel answers like he was obligated to recuse himself. If that's the case so early in his job as AG he had an obligation to offer Trump his resignation.

The Boy Scout did his duty and stepped aside so absolutely no one could blame him for being impartial which allowed Rod Wire Rosenstein to appoint a special counsel with a team of 18 Trump hating democrats. Nice one Sessions.

aggiehawg said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

---

Oooh, the documents will be filed on the public docket, meaning they are not subject to the protective order and Sydney can talk about them.

Popcorn time.

---

Doesn't sound like much: 32 pages of handwritten notes & a few pages with hand written notations.

That letter has no teeth, unfortunately.

How difficult is it to produce those documents?

Per your previous comments, it sounded like most law firms have all of their documents extremely well organized and filed. And they're only sending them over electronically, so there shouldn't be THAT much labor involved. Besides, it can't be that much different than the massive requests and demands they get every day.

Just spit balling for two reasons, one is I too am dying to see those phone call records, and if the court demanded these docs, isn't C&B kinda pushing Sullivan's patience, not unlike Powell did for a while?

So why would H.R. McMaster not be as hands on as Flynn would have been?