Anonymous wrote:Seems to be the working MO of the Trump crowd

How are these records produced? When I served as a note-taker in 1996 on phone calls between President Bill Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin, typically several of us from the National Security Council staff sat in the White House basement with headphones on, taking notes that we would then use to produce a formal memorandum of telephone conversation.

The quality of the notes varies, depending on the number and quality of the note-takers. It might sound easy. It isn’t — particularly if there is only one note-taker trying desperately to make a record of the conversation. Normally that record would list who the note-takers were; look for that fact in the record when it’s released. If there is more than one note-taker, they confer and go over their notes to produce the most accurate account possible; the greater the number of those taking notes, the more likely the final memorandum can be relied upon as accurate. Often there are one or more officials in the room with the president, listening in on the phone call. If so, they might be listed as well on the formal memorandum.

When the notes are typed up to produce the formal memorandum, that draft memorandum goes up the NSC chain for formal approval for distribution to a select group of officials. In that process, one of the top NSC officials could direct the staff to take certain material out of the memorandum — because once it goes out for distribution, a number of officials, including those at other agencies such as the State Department, will see the record. Given the chaotic nature of the NSC under Trump, we do not even know what kind of formal process has been followed for producing these memorandums.

But here’s the key point: The record we will see should not be called a transcript. Beyond any coded way of speaking that the president might have, the record could be misleading in any number of ways. The notes may not have captured the exact wording — not for nefarious reasons but simply because of the note-takers’ limited capacity to write as they listen, especially if only one person was taking notes. Certain things may have been removed from the record before it was approved for distribution within the government. And certain things may be removed before the president releases the memorandum publicly, regardless of the president’s assurance that it will be “complete and unredacted.”

Anonymous wrote:Seems to be the working MO of the Trump crowd

Anonymous wrote:"The same report that shows Flynn discussed the call with the transition team. And the same president elect who kept saying he would like to see if he could have a better relationship with Russia"

Flynn had denied discussing the call with the transition team, but if he did, then the transition team was apprised of the call and thus ergo aware of the Quid pro Quo. That makes more legal trouble for Trump and Pence.

Anonymous wrote:If you click on the link you get the fuller discussion

Anonymous wrote:Where Eli Lake admits a quid pro quo

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His reasoning to withdraw his guilty plea is, he changed his mind. He didn't say that there's a fair and just reason. Because there isn't one.

Misbehavior on the part of the prosecution. Withholding exculpatory evidence. FBI misbehavior, as well.

He didn't say that.

And that didn't happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His reasoning to withdraw his guilty plea is, he changed his mind. He didn't say that there's a fair and just reason. Because there isn't one.

Misbehavior on the part of the prosecution. Withholding exculpatory evidence. FBI misbehavior, as well.

He didn't say that.

And that didn't happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His reasoning to withdraw his guilty plea is, he changed his mind. He didn't say that there's a fair and just reason. Because there isn't one.

Misbehavior on the part of the prosecution. Withholding exculpatory evidence. FBI misbehavior, as well.

Anonymous wrote:His reasoning to withdraw his guilty plea is, he changed his mind. He didn't say that there's a fair and just reason. Because there isn't one.

Anonymous wrote:His reasoning to withdraw his guilty plea is, he changed his mind. He didn't say that there's a fair and just reason. Because there isn't one.