Barr Installs Outside Prosecutor to Review Case Against Michael Flynn, Ex-Trump Adviser

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:nope nope nope

If you are going to claim Flynn acted properly and th "unmasking" was unwarranted, then the call has to be released in order to validate said claim. Can't have it both ways.

And hey, Sen Rand, how much money did your PAC take from Russia and did you enjoy your time in Moscow?

First of all, it is not YOUR call as to what is released. He was the incoming National Security Advisor. He had every right to talk to a foreign diplomat. What he saiid to him matters not one whit.

What matters is what he said to the FBI agents interviewing him and what they wrote on their 302s. And, the original 302 is still missing. The one Pientka wrote and Page and Strzok edited.
Don't you find it interesting that Pientka has been totally silent? That nobody has heard from him? I suspect there is a reason.

The redacted original 302 is online: https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-special-counsel-releases-flynn-302

This isn't hard people.

This is not the original. The original was the one before Page and Strzok edited it in "Pientka's voice."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Unless, of course, Flynn was the actual target and his name was never really masked. This remains to be seen.

It doesn't remain to be seen. There is ZERO evidence of the conspiracy theory you are implying. The documents released by Grennell confirm that.

+1 give it up. There’s nothing going on.

Really? Someone leaked it to the WaPo. Now they have narrowed the field down...Durham can take it from there.

You know, it wasn't necessarily an American who "leaked" the report. It could have been the Russians or someone from the FiveEye alliance.

Do you think the Americans are the only ones who monitor calls involving Russian spies?

[Anonymous]

Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

I mean seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

Has it occurred to you that he did not lie about it? Of course, he knew. He discussed many things with the ambassador and the conversation about the sanctions was pretty limited--please don't escalate. The original leak implied that he had discussed eliminating the sanctions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

Has it occurred to you that he did not lie about it? Of course, he knew. He discussed many things with the ambassador and the conversation about the sanctions was pretty limited--please don't escalate. The original leak implied that he had discussed eliminating the sanctions.

You should let him know he didn’t lie, since Pence and Trump said he lied... and he plead guilty to lying ... twice... in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Unless, of course, Flynn was the actual target and his name was never really masked. This remains to be seen.

It doesn't remain to be seen. There is ZERO evidence of the conspiracy theory you are implying. The documents released by Grennell confirm that.

+1 give it up. There’s nothing going on.

Really? Someone leaked it to the WaPo. Now they have narrowed the field down...Durham can take it from there.

You know, it wasn't necessarily an American who "leaked" the report. It could have been the Russians or someone from the FiveEye alliance.

Do you think the Americans are the only ones who monitor calls involving Russian spies?

It may not be "necessarily"...but it is likely. I'm sure Durham will get to the bottom of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

Has it occurred to you that he did not lie about it? Of course, he knew. He discussed many things with the ambassador and the conversation about the sanctions was pretty limited--please don't escalate. The original leak implied that he had discussed eliminating the sanctions.

McGahn said he lied.
Pence said he lied.
Trump tweeted he lied.

Are you the only one who thinks he didn't lie?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

Has it occurred to you that he did not lie about it? Of course, he knew. He discussed many things with the ambassador and the conversation about the sanctions was pretty limited--please don't escalate. The original leak implied that he had discussed eliminating the sanctions.

So when Flynn twice affirmed before a court of law, both in writing and orally that he lied, was he lying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

Has it occurred to you that he did not lie about it? Of course, he knew. He discussed many things with the ambassador and the conversation about the sanctions was pretty limited--please don't escalate. The original leak implied that he had discussed eliminating the sanctions.

You should let him know he didn’t lie, since Pence and Trump said he lied... and he plead guilty to lying ... twice... in court.

Trump and Pence said that he lied, because that is what they were told.

If Flynn had the benefit of exculpatory evidence at the time, he may not have made the same plea.

[Anonymous]

We could probably clear this up in a few minutes if Pientka was allowed to testify.

Where is he? And, why hasn't he been asked?
Or, maybe he has. By, Durham or Jensen.
We should know soon enough.

[Anonymous]

"Obama-gate" = Birtherism

Propogated tripe BY TRUMP to froth the right.

Will it work again?

Probably, because Americans are inherently stupid, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Obama-gate" = Birtherism

Propogated tripe BY TRUMP to froth the right.

Will it work again?

Probably, because Americans are inherently stupid, I guess.

Probably, because Americans are inherently stupid, I guess.

Sorry...... Those who brought us 3 years of the phony "Russsia-gate" have no credibility calling "Obama-gate" a tripe or hoax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

Has it occurred to you that he did not lie about it? Of course, he knew. He discussed many things with the ambassador and the conversation about the sanctions was pretty limited--please don't escalate. The original leak implied that he had discussed eliminating the sanctions.

Yes, we haven't seen the transcript but we know that he told the Russian ambassador to not worry about the sanctions because they would be lifted.

The conversation has been described as "very bad". Minimize all you want. The transcript will come out and then you'll just find some other unfactual absurdity to argue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michael Flynn seemingly entered into that conversation with no idea that U.S. intelligence would be spying on Sergey Kislyak shows that he had no business being a National Security Advisor to begin with.

Has it occurred to you that he did not lie about it? Of course, he knew. He discussed many things with the ambassador and the conversation about the sanctions was pretty limited--please don't escalate. The original leak implied that he had discussed eliminating the sanctions.

Yes, we haven't seen the transcript but we know that he told the Russian ambassador to not worry about the sanctions because they would be lifted.

The conversation has been described as "very bad". Minimize all you want. The transcript will come out and then you'll just find some other unfactual absurdity to argue.

If the conversation was very bad, why wasn't he charged with anything related to it? And no, there were no other charges that were "plead down". Nothing in the plea deal.