Quote:

---

First I've heard that Durham may produce a report. I thought it would just be indictments. That report should be good reading...

---

Barr is referring to an internal report, not a public report. At least at this juncture he's not planning on releasing it publicly. That might change, however.

But really came here to post about this article.

Quote:

---

The new Flynn documents shed light on what happened during the unusual three weeks composing the 302. They include texts between Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who were communicating extensively during an extramarital affair in interchanges revealing anti-Trump bias and resulting in their later dismissal from Mueller's investigation.

In one text, dated February 10, Strzok tells Page he is heavily editing Pientka's 302 form to the point he's "trying not to completely re-write" it. Other messages reveal that Page, who did not attend the interview, reviewed the 302 form and made editing suggestions. On February 14, Page texts Strzok, "Is Andy good with the 302?" presumably referring to FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe. The next day, February 15, the Flynn 302 was officially submitted and filed with the FBI.

---

So how bad was the ignoring all 302 protocol here? Very bad.

Quote:

---

FBI supervisors, however, are not supposed to rewrite other agents' 302 forms. Nor are 302 forms supposed to be edited by FBI personnel who were not present at the interview, and both of these things happened in the Flynn case. "I've probably written in the close to the low thousands of 302s. I've probably supervised or overseen thousands upon thousands of more of those," James Gagliano, retired 25-year veteran of the FBI and current CNN analyst, told RealClearInvestigations. "This is not how we do business as an FBI supervisor. I never, ever materially altered a 302."

---

Quote:

---

Former Special Agent Thomas J. Baker agreed: "We never changed an agent's 302. An agent would fight a supervisor who wanted him to change the 302, because it's what that agent observed and heard and in his interview. So for us to read, what's documented in this new material, that coming back from that interview with Flynn, which is a key event, that Peter Strzok said he virtually rewrote the whole thing it damned them with their own words."

Both former agents also expressed concern that Page, who was not present at the interview, was editing the 302 form against FBI protocol. "For Strzok to send that 302 to Lisa Page, a non-badge wearing, non-credential-having FBI agent, is unconscionable," says Gagliano.

---

Quote:

---

Baker said it was "not normal and suspicious" that it took three weeks for Pientka's 302 form chronicling the Flynn interview to be filed. Gagliano also found the time delay concerning. "If the interview is on Monday, you better have that 302 uploaded on Friday. That's a requirement. Now if you go outside of that, does that mean that there's some skullduggery afoot? No, but you're going to explain that in court," Gagliano said. "A defense attorney worth his or her salt will make hay with that. 'Hey agent Gagliano, you know what the requirement is in the Bureau, right? Why was this thing typed up seven days after the interview?' And then you sit there hemming and hawing and a dead-to-rights case gets blown open because you didn't follow a protocol."

---

Sydney Powell would have made mincemeat out of Strzok and Pientka had this case gone to trial. But the thing to remember is that Covington, Burling would have done the same, if the fix wasn't in and they were honest and ethical defense attorneys. And not put too fine a point on it, Barr could have just looked at all the shenanigans with the 302 and conclude the case was a loser for the DOJ, even without all of the other stuff.

Quote:

---

Even after the Flynn 302 was collectively written during the weeks-long delay in submission, the original wasn't initially used in the case. Instead, Baker said, Mueller's team submitted their own interview with Strzok "about his recollection of the interview with Flynn five or six months ago. Now that's just bizarre."

---

Quote:

---

Eventually, the 302 was filed to the court in two versions, requiring a convoluted explanation about what had happened. In a cover letter to District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan dated December 17, 2018, Brandon Van Grack, a prosecutor on the Mueller probe, explained:

Quote:

---

Pursuant to the Court's Minute Order dated today, the government hereby files two redacted versions of the FD-302 report summarizing the FBI's interview of the defendant on January 24, 2017. See Attachment. The content of both versions of the report is identical, except 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.

---

---

Quote:

---

Hovering over all these questions about what happened with Flynn's 302 is the silence of Joe Pientka, the other agent who was present for the Flynn interview. The FBI rebuffed congressional requests to make him available for questions. The Bureau argued that because Pientka was assigned to the Mueller probe, interviewing him would interfere with the special counsel's investigation.

However, the Muller probe concluded last year, and the new revelations are shining a spotlight on Pientka's absence. On May 4, Republican Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mike Johnson of Louisiana sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray demanding, among other things, that he make Pientka available for a transcribed interview regarding Flynn.

And other key lawmakers are determined to hold the FBI accountable for what happened in the Flynn case. "The FBI set up General Flynn -- that is clear as day," Rep. Devin Nunes, ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, tells RealClearInvestigations. "There is FBI leadership ordering the case kept open when agents wanted to close it for lack of evidence, the discussion of getting Flynn to lie or trying to get him fired, the ambush interview, the withholding of exculpatory evidence, and many other acts of blatant malfeasance. None of this is standard procedure. It's a naked abuse of authority."

---

LINK

There it is again. "Abuse of authority." This is heading towards obstruction of justice charges, in my view.

So basically, as many have suspected on this thread, the whole Mueller Investigation was to cover up FBI/DOJ/Intelligence Agencies/Obama WH malfeasance in spying on political campaign.

The lawyers engineering a side deal that wouldn't be part of a Giglio disclosure alone is reason for being disbarred imo. The fact that they purposely withheld exculpatory evidence is reason for criminal prosecution for conspiracy against rights. The whole thing stinks.

VaultingChemist said:

---

How did the FBI and DOJ leadership manage to have so many lawyers with almost no ethics concerning the application of the law?

If criminal charges can't be levied by Barr and Durham against these lawyers, can they succeed in disbarring them?

Finally, who was the informant in the FBI and DOJ that tipped off Sara Carter and John Solomon about all the unethical activity committed by those in the leadership?

---

Comey brought in like-minded lawyers and agents when he was confirmed Director. They were a team.

And yes, complaints can be made against the lawyers by people harmed by their unethical conduct. Also judges can make referrals for disciplinary proceedings against lawyers appearing in their court. (Even just signing a pleading is an "appearance.")

As to the identities of Solomon's and Carter's FBI sources, they won't be revealed unless they consent to be revealed. (Highly unlikely, wouldn't want to get Arkancided.)

BTW, am I the only one who has noticed the CIA hasn't been much in the news recently? Especially compared to Brennan's regime? Seems to me Gina Haspel has tightened up her neck of the woods and shut that crap down.

akm91 said:

---

So basically, as many have suspected on this thread, the whole Mueller Investigation was to cover up FBI/DOJ/Intelligence Agencies/Obama WH malfeasance in spying on political campaign.

---

Sort of like an "insurance policy"

I would love for all these bad actors to be taken down; however, if just Comey, McCabe and Brennan can be ruined... I could be happy with that. Would truly like to see Brennan take the needle.

Quote:

---

In 2017, Judge Sullivan wrote in the WSJ that "Judges have a responsibility to take action against unethical prosecutors."

---

This will be the acid test for Sullivan. He has ample grounds to hammer Van Grack and has had ample grounds to hammer him for quite some time, IMO. After all of this has been revealed, what will he do? Keep his DC Cocktail circuit friends happy? Or do what he has stated is his duty?

SIAP: Great oped by Jim Jordan breaking down the Flynn case.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/08/rep-jim-jordan-a-look-back-on-the-russia-mueller-and-flynn-investigations/

LOL. One sentence.

Quote:

---

We were right about everything.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

LOL. One sentence.

Quote:

---

We were right about everything.

---

---

I know, I clicked on the link and all that was there was a single sentence "We were right about everything". And I'm like, yep that is a damn good article!

fasthorse05 said:

---

Since Hawg brought up the lack of CIA news notices, is there anyone here who doesn't believe Jarrett isn't involved in Spygate somehow.

I'm not expecting some huge revelation in the next week, but I'm very sure she either knew, or helped plan. I'd guess she''s done many things like that in her prior 25 years, especially the banking articles I've read.

---

I think Jarrett was directing Susan Rice and Samantha Powers on the massive unmaskings they were doing. Keeping her and Obama's hands clean.

aggiehawg said:

---

fasthorse05 said:

---

Since Hawg brought up the lack of CIA news notices, is there anyone here who doesn't believe Jarrett isn't involved in Spygate somehow.

I'm not expecting some huge revelation in the next week, but I'm very sure she either knew, or helped plan. I'd guess she''s done many things like that in her prior 25 years, especially the banking articles I've read.

---

I think Jarrett was directing Susan Rice and Samantha Powers on the massive unmaskings they were doing. Keeping her and Obama's hands clean.

---

Jarrett was the only one (a) high enough in the totem pole, (b) smart enough, and (c) arrogant enough to have orchestrated/directed this whole thing. She also obviously hates America and loves Iran/our enemies but maybe I am biased there.

I respect her intelligence though and doubt she allowed any of her actions to be documented to such a degree someone like Barr would seek to indict her today. Idiots like Rice, Powers, Brennan Holder etc. are vastly more likely to be 'sacrificial lambs.'

Quote:

---

I respect her intelligence though and doubt she allowed any of her actions to be documented to such a degree someone like Barr would seek to indict her today. Idiots like Rice, Powers, Brennan Holder etc. are vastly more likely to be 'sacrificial lambs.'

---

Jarrett is wicked smart and she certainly knew how to protect Obama's flank.

But now that Biden is mentally losing it, that might be all for naught. Biden has already implicated Obama in the Hunter Biden/Burisma mess. There's no telling what he might say about the Flynn crap, if he's ever asked.

And that might be the final nail in Biden's candidacy. He'll quit if Obama tells him to. And waiting until after Biden slips up and then claiming Biden can't be trusted because of mental impairment won't fly after the fact.