MUST READ – Full Interview Transcript of AG Barr Discussing Dropping the Flynn Case…

Q: Does the new evidence show that the counterintelligence case against General Flynn was simply left open to lay a trap for lying?

BARR: Yes. Essentially.

As customary CBS only broadcast a small snippet of the interview between CBS reporter Catherine Herridge and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr.   The full interview is much longer and much more interesting than the edited narrative broadcast by CBS.

When you read the conversation you will immediately notice why CBS refused to broadcast it, and why the segment that did air was so brutally edited.

Some of the interview answers will provide hope for those who want to see justice delivered. However, there are also cautious answers that should be considered when formulating an opinion of AG Bill Barr’s ongoing intention.  Below is the transcript.

[Transcript] Catherine Herridge: Attorney General Barr, thank you for speaking first to CBS News.

Attorney General William Barr: Hi, Catherine.

♦ Q: What action has the Justice Department taken today in the Michael Flynn case?

BARR: We dismissed or are moving to dismiss the charges against General Flynn. At any stage during a proceeding, even after indictment or a conviction or a guilty plea, the Department can move to dismiss the charges if we determine that our standards of prosecution have not been met.

As you recall, in January, General Flynn moved to withdraw his plea, and also alleged misconduct by the government. And at that time, I asked a very seasoned U.S. attorney, who had spent ten years as an FBI agent and ten years as a career prosecutor, Jeff Jensen, from St. Louis, to come in and take a fresh look at this whole case. And he found some additional material. And last week, he came in and briefed me and made a recommendation that we dismiss the case, which I fully agreed with, as did the U.S. attorney in D.C. So we’ve moved to dismiss the case.

♦ Q: So this decision to dismiss by the Justice Department, this all came together really within the last week, based on new evidence?

BARR: Right. Well U.S. Attorney Jensen since January has been investigating this. And he reported to me last week.

♦ Q: Does Judge Sullivan have a say?

BARR: Yes. Under the rules, the case can be dismissed with leave of court. Generally, the courts have said that that provision is in there to protect defendants, to make sure the government doesn’t play games by bringing a charge and then dismissing it; bringing another charge, dismissing it. But he does have a say.

♦ Q: But is the Flynn case effectively over today from the Justice Department’s point of view?

BARR: We think the case against Flynn for false statements should be dismissed, as far as the Department of Justice is concerned.

♦ Q: And depending on the judge’s decision, could charges be brought against General Flynn in the future for other actions he took during the presidential campaign or during the transition?

BARR: Well, no charges like that have been brought. And I’m not gonna speculate about what charges there may be.

♦ Q: All of that said, General Flynn pled guilty to lying to federal investigators during his interview in January of 2017. And Flynn admitted in court, quote, his “false statements and omissions impeded and otherwise had a material impact on the FBI’s ongoing investigation into the existence of any links or coordination between individuals with the campaign and Russia’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.” Does the fact remain that General Flynn lied to federal investigators?

BARR: Well to constitute a false statement, you need two things. One, you need a false statement, lie. And then it has to be material to a legitimate investigation. And I think on the question of lying, it’s as Comey, Director Comey said just a few months after this episode, he said it was a closed question. And that, while you might make that argument, it was a very closed question.

But it’s on the question of materiality that we feel really that a crime cannot be established here because there was not, in our view, a legitimate investigation going on. They did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage, based on a perfectly legitimate and appropriate call he made as a member of the transition. So.

Let me just also say that when he pled, the issue of materiality is related to whether the government has a bona fide investigation going on. And that’s information that’s really within the control of the government. The individual party would really not have that information. So as new information just became available that has a bearing on whether there was a legitimate investigation, that requires us, our duty, we think is to dismiss the case.

♦ Q: Does the new evidence show that the counterintelligence case against General Flynn was simply left open to lay a trap for lying?

BARR: Yes. Essentially.

They had started a counterintelligence investigation during the summer, as you know, related to the campaign. But in December, the team, the Crossfire Hurricane team, was closing that and determined they had found nothing to justify continuing with that investigation against Flynn.

On the very day they prepared the final papers, the seventh floor, that is the director’s office and the deputy director’s office up there, sent down word they should keep that open. So that they could try to go and question Flynn about this call he had with the Russian ambassador.

Let me say that, at that point, he was the designated national security adviser for President-Elect Trump, and was part of the transition, which is recognized by the government and funded by the government as an important function to bring in a new administration. And it is very typical, very common for the national security team of the incoming president to communicate with foreign leaders.

And that call, there was nothing wrong with it whatever. In fact, it was laudable. He– and it was nothing inconsistent with the Obama administration’s policies. And it was in U.S. interests. He was saying to the Russians, you know, “Don’t escalate.” And they asked him if he remembered saying that, and he said he didn’t remember that.

♦ Q: What should Americans take away from your actions in the Flynn case today?

BARR: Well, as I said in my confirmation hearing, one of the reasons I came back is because I was concerned that people were feeling there were two standards of justice in this country. And that the political and that the justice, or the law enforcement process was being used to play political games. And I wanted to make sure that we restore confidence in the system. There’s only one standard of justice. And I believe that this case, that justice in this case requires dismissing the charges against General Flynn.

♦ Q: Are the actions you’re taking today bigger than the Flynn case?

Well, I think they are bigger because I hope that it sends the message that there is one standard of justice in this country. And that’s the way it will be. It doesn’t matter what political party you’re in, or, you know, whether you’re rich or poor. We will follow the same standard for everybody. Was there a crime committed, do we believe a crime was committed? And do we have the evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? And we don’t think either of those standards were applicable here.

♦ Q: Has this been one of the most consequential decisions that you have made as attorney general?

I don’t know. I let other people judge that. It’s certainly – I feel good about the decision because that’s what we’re here to do. We’re here to do what’s right.

♦ Q: Not what’s easy.


♦ Q: Was it an easy decision?

BARR: It was an easy decision, yes. I think easy because once I saw all the facts and some of the tactics used by the FBI in this instance and also the legal problems with the case, it was an easy decision. You know, one thing people will see when they look at the documents is how Director Comey purposely went around the Justice Department and ignored Deputy Attorney General Yates.

Deputy Attorney General Yates, I’ve disagreed with her about a couple of things, but, you know, here she upheld the fine tradition of the Department of Justice. She said that the new administration has to be treated just like the Obama administration, and they should go and tell the White House about their findings. They and, you know, Director Comey ran around that.

♦ Q: When the special counsel report was released last year, you were accused by critics of putting your thumb on the scale in the president’s favor. Are you doing the president’s bidding in General Flynn’s case?

No, I’m doing the law’s bidding. I’m doing my duty under the law, as I see it.

♦ Q: President Trump recently tweeted about the Flynn case. He said, “What happened to General Flynn should never be allowed to happen to a citizen of the United States again.” Were you influenced in any way by the president or his tweets?

BARR: No, not at all. And, you know, I made clear during my confirmation hearing that I was gonna look into what happened in 2016 and ’17. I made that crystal clear. I was very concerned about what happened. I was gonna get to the bottom of it. And that included the treatment of General Flynn.

And that is part of John Durham, U.S. Attorney John Durham’s portfolio. The reason we had to take this action now and why U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen came in was because it was prompted by the motions that were filed in that case. And so we had to sorta move more quickly on it. But John Durham is still looking at all of this.

This is one particular episode, but we view it as part of a number of related acts. And we’re looking at the whole pattern of conduct.

♦ Q: The whole pattern of conduct before?

BARR: And after.

♦ Q: And after?

BARR: Yeah, the election.

♦ Q: After the election? Okay. You talk about the importance of timing in this decision. What was the evidence that helped you decide this issue?

BARR: I think a very important evidence here was that this was not a bona fide counterintelligence investigation – was that they were closing the investigation in December. They started that process. And on January 4th, they were closing it.

And that when they heard about the phone call, which is – the FBI had the transcripts too – there’s no question as to what was discussed. The FBI knew exactly what was discussed. And General Flynn, being the former director of the DIA, said to them, you know, “You listen, you listen to everything. You know, you know what was said.”

So there was no mystery about the call. But they initially tried some theories of how they could open another investigation, which didn’t fly. And then they found out that they had not technically closed the earlier investigation. And they kept it open for the express purpose of trying to catch, lay a perjury trap for General Flynn.

They didn’t warn him, the way we usually would be required by the Department. They bypassed the Justice Department. They bypassed the protocols at the White House and so forth. These were things that persuaded me that there was not a legitimate counterintelligence investigation going on.

♦ Q: You know you’re gonna take a lot of incoming, as they say in the military, for this decision. Are you prepared for that?

BARR: Yeah, I’m prepared for that. I also think it’s sad that nowadays these partisan feelings are so strong that people have lost any sense of justice. And the groups that usually worry about civil liberties and making sure that there’s proper procedures followed and standards set seem to be ignoring it and willing to destroy people’s lives and see great injustices done.

♦ Q: Just to be clear, you said this was your decision.

BARR: Uh-huh.

♦ Q: Did you consult or discuss the decision in any way with President Trump?


♦ Q: Did you advise the White House that you had made this decision?

BARR: No. They were aware, because of the schedule, that the Department would be saying something in court. And I said that we’d make up our mind what to do and file, you know, sometime before Monday. File our responses to what was going on in court. But other than that, no.

♦ Q: So the White House became aware of the decision when it filed today?

BARR: Yes.

♦ Q: Not earlier?


♦ Q: No. Okay. A lot of records have come to light. You talk about the records for closing the Flynn case. Were those new records to you? Because–

BARR: Yes.

♦ Q: –of Jensen? Okay. All right. In addition to those records, there are handwritten notes from January 24th, 2017. This was the day of Michael Flynn’s interview. And the writer states, “What is our goal? Truth, admission, or to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” Is that a routine, by-the-book conversation between senior FBI officials?

BARR: Well, as many people point out, you know, it’s not unusual. In the course of a bona fide investigation, when you’re doing a criminal investigation or a counterintelligence investigation, that has a basis it’s not unusual to have an interview with someone and expecting that they might lie. But here’s what’s different here is that there was no underlying investigation that was legitimate. And the whole exercise was just about creating the lie.

♦ Q: But that language, does it bother you at all?

BARR: Well, my understanding is, just looking at the documents, the way I interpret them, is there was a disagreement. And that one of the agents, one of the senior agents felt that “Let’s not be game playing here. We have the transcript. Show him the transcripts and find out what you wanna find out.”

Instead of instead of, you know, essentially reading excerpts and saying, “Do you remember saying that?” which seemed to be all for the purpose of trying to catch him in something that could be called a lie. But, again, because the FBI knew about the call, there was nothing wrong with the call, the FBI has the transcript of the call, whether or not he remembered saying something is not material to anything.

♦ Q: Who at the FBI was driving this?

BARR: Well, this particular episode, it looks like the impetus came from the seventh floor.

♦ Q: The seventh floor is Director Comey.

BARR: I believe it’s Director Comey and the deputy’s office.

♦ Q: Based on the evidence that you have seen, did senior FBI officials conspire to throw out the national security adviser?

BARR: Well, as I said, this is a particular episode. And it has some troubling features to it, as we’ve discussed. But I think, you know, that’s a question that really has to wait an analysis of all the different episodes that occurred through the summer of 2016 and the first several months of President Trump’s administration.

♦ Q: What are the consequences for these individuals?

BARR: Well, you know, I don’t wanna, you know, we’re in the middle of looking at all of this. John Durham’s investigation, and U.S. Attorney Jensen, I’m gonna ask him to do some more work on different items as well. And I’m gonna wait till all the evidence is, and I get their recommendations as to what they found and how serious it is.

But if, you know, if we were to find wrongdoing, in the sense of any criminal act, you know, obviously we would, we would follow through on that. But, again, you know, just because something may even stink to high heaven and be, you know, appear everyone to be bad we still have to apply the right standard and be convinced that there’s a violation of a criminal statute. And that we can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The same standard applies to everybody.

♦ Q: It sounds to me like one of your objectives is to never allow the Justice Department to be used as a political weapon. That’s what you’re saying you think happened here?

BARR: I think, yes. I think there was an aspect of that. And I think, for the last several decades, the Department has been used more and more, or the efforts have been made to draw the Department into that. And I think it’s very important that that not happen.

People, you know, we should choose our leaders through the election process. And efforts to use the law enforcement process to change leaders or to disable administrations are incendiary in this country and destroy our republic.

♦ Q: Before we move on to some separate questions, many of these records should have been provided to Flynn’s defense team long ago. Do you still have confidence in FBI Director Christopher Wray?

BARR: Well, you know, Chris Wray has always supported and been very helpful in various investigations we’ve been running. He cooperated fully with Durham, cooperated fully with Jensen. But, you know, there are a lot of cases in the Department of Justice and I don’t consider it the director’s responsibility to make sure that all the documents are produced in each case. So I don’t– I wouldn’t say that this has affected my confidence in Director Wray.

♦ Q: Does Director Wray have what it takes to make the changes at the FBI?

BARR: Yeah, as I’ve said, you know, he’s been a great partner to me in our effort to restore the American people’s confidence in both the Department of Justice and the FBI. And we work very well together. And I think both of us know that we have to step up. That it’s very important to restore the American people’s confidence.

♦ Q: Does he have his arms around the gravity of what happened in 2016 and 2017?

BARR: I think he does.

♦ Q: Newly declassified footnotes in the Horowitz report suggest that the Steele dossier was likely the product of Russian disinformation. And there were multiple warnings to the FBI at that time, yet they continued to use that. How do you explain that?

BARR: I think that’s one of the most troubling aspects of this whole thing. And, in fact, I said it in testimony on the Hill, I can’t remember if it was my confirmation, that I said I was very concerned about the possibility that that dossier and Steele’s activities were used as a vector for the Russians to inject disinformation into the political campaign.

I think that is something that Robert Mueller was responsible for looking at under his charter, which is the potential of Russian influence. But I think it was ignored and there was mounting indications that this could very well have been happening and no one really stopped to look at it.

♦ Q: These are very smart people who were working in the special counsel’s office, and in senior levels of the FBI. So what drove them here?

BARR: Well, I think one of the things you have to guard against, both as a prosecutor and I think as an investigator, is that if you get too wedded to a particular outcome and you’re pursuing a particular agenda, you close your eyes to anything that sort of doesn’t fit with your preconception. And I think that’s probably the phenomenon we’re looking at here.

♦ Q: You know more about the investigation since Horowitz, since December. Do you see more evidence of personal or political bias today?

BARR: You know, I’m not gonna, again, get into reaching a conclusion at this point till I see everything. There’s certainly more information that has come out that, you know, points in that direction. But I haven’t reached a final conclusion.

♦ Q: Before we just move onto to a couple of off-topic questions, the last thing most Americans remember about General Flynn is that he resigned, was fired. And that he admitted lying to the FBI. Does the fact remain that he lied?

BARR: Well, you know, people sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes. And as I said, the question of lying, you know, it’s something he would know about. On its face, as Director Comey said, it’s not so clear. But the question of materiality is not something he would know about. That’s something that the government knows about. And we have now gotten into it, drilled down, obtained new information. And the Department of Justice is not persuaded that this was material to any legitimate counterintelligence investigation. So it was not a crime.

♦ Q: Before we leave this topic, is there anything that you would like to add?


♦ Q: Okay. Just on COVID-19. Some of the news of today. The valet at the White House has tested positive. Have you had any exposure or interaction with this valet?

BARR: I don’t think I have, no.

♦ Q: Do you have a view on whether the president, the vice president should self-quarantine or be separated?

BARR: No, you know, I don’t have a view on that. I don’t know about how close they were physically or what the medical advice is the president gets. But we’re tested pretty regularly when we’re over at the White House to visit.

♦ Q: Every day, every other day?

BARR: It depends how frequently, though at least once a week, but sometimes, you know, if you’ve been around and could have been infected, you can get further testing.

♦ Q: The president said that he’s urging the Supreme Court to overturn the Affordable Care Act when it’s taken up in the Supreme Court later this year. What’s your position? Is that something the Justice Department will continue to back?

BARR: Yes. You know, we had an opportunity, all the stakeholders in the administration, to discuss this, and the Department is going to be taking the position as the president states.

♦ Q: Even if that means stripping millions of Americans of their health care in the middle of a pandemic?

BARR: Well, the case isn’t gonna be argued until October. And the president’s made clear that he strongly supports coverage of preexisting conditions. And there will be coverage of preexisting conditions. And, you know, he expects to fix and replace Obamacare with a better health care system.

♦ Q: If governors continue to limit the size of gatherings, including religious services, what further action is the Justice Department prepared to take?

BARR: Well, I think initially, you know, at the very beginning of the crisis, before we knew very much — and while, in some places, the infection rates were skyrocketing and threatening to overwhelm our health care system, you know, the initial limitations may have been defensible. But as time goes by, it’s harder to justify those kinds of blanket restrictions on religious practice.

I think, if people can follow social distancing by leaving space, wearing masks and so forth, there has to be accommodation to religious practice. The Department has already entered a few cases around the country where there have been these sweeping prohibitions against religion where there were comparable secular activities are not controlled the same way.

♦ Q: On the Bureau of Prisons– currently 2,100 inmates and over 360 Bureau prison staff have tested positive for COVID-19. Will you make universal testing available to the inmates and the staff?

BARR: I think over time, we’ll be testing and perhaps get to that point. You know, we got, right at the beginning, I dealt with FEMA and I was able to get some of the Abbott machines. And we’ve been building up our testing capacity. And we’re doing more and more tests.

And, you know, we’ve been trying to keep our inmates as safe as we can. We let a lot of inmates who are older and don’t pose a threat to the community, we’ve put them on home confinement to get ’em outta the institutions. So we’re taking every measure we can to protect those inmates.

Generally speaking, historically, the infection rates roughly, from what I’ve seen, are comparable inside the institution (SIC) as they are in society at large. And we’ve been able to prevent our prisons from becoming Petri dishes where they sweep through with the same lethality that they have in, you know, nursing homes and so forth. It takes a lotta work, and the Bureau of Prisons has been working hard on that.

♦ Q: In closing, this was a big decision in the Flynn case, to– to say the least. When history looks back on this decision, how do you think it will be written? What will it say about your decision making?

BARR: Well, history is written by the winner. So it largely depends on who’s writing the history. But I think a fair history would say that it was a good decision because it upheld the rule of law. It helped, it upheld the standards of the Department of Justice, and it undid what was an injustice.

♦ Q: Uh-huh.

BARR: I mean, it’s not gonna be the end of it.

♦ Q: What do you mean, it’s not the end of it?

BARR: Well, I said we’re gonna get to the bottom of what happened.

♦ Q: And later this year, do you expect a report from U.S. Attorney John Durham? Or do you expect indictments?

BARR: Well, as you know, I’m not gonna predict the outcome. But I said that we’re certainly — there probably will be a report as a byproduct of his work. But we also are seeing if there are people who violated the law and should be brought to justice. And that’s what we have our eye on.

♦ Q: And that would include individuals involved in the Flynn case?

BARR: I don’t wanna get into particular individuals.

♦ Q: Attorney General William Barr, thank you very much for joining us here at CBS News.

Barr: Thank you.

[Source Link]

flynn meme

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

841 Responses to MUST READ – Full Interview Transcript of AG Barr Discussing Dropping the Flynn Case…

  1. jeffsn4 says:

    Compared to the hacks in the MSM, Herridge is pretty good but she’s clearly a Democrat working for other Democrats.

    Liked by 2 people

    • …..but she’s still going a good job. You can’t blame her for the editors chopping up/editing her interview.

      Liked by 5 people

      • jeffsn4 says:

        Actually I wasn’t talking about the editing, I was referring to some of her questions straight out of Acosta’s notebook.


      • regitiger says:

        Yes you can..and must.

        If a journalist of integrity is having their work big footed, You exit stage left file a protest and then proceed to go out alone with another venue free of obstruction!!

        The argument that journalist are captive to msm agenda is dull and hits directly at institutional corruption.

        The reality is that these journalist make a decision.

        Take the money


        Do a real job protected by the Constitution.

        Most select option 1


        Liked by 1 person

  2. waterthelibertytree01 says:

    Flynn was targeted for his abject opposition to the Benghazi operation. O and his lackeys from that point on went after him. Once he got aligned with PJT in the campaign and after, they saw an avenue to more to destroying PJT and his presidency. It’s 1000% treason.

    The scuttlebutt on Benghazi case is the Al Baghdadi raid netted all the documents and proof of Zero/HRC’s treason. Be prepared for this to come out in due time.

    Liked by 9 people

    • railer says:

      Also, the surface to air missiles we gave those islamofascists in Libya were useless to them, after Obama destroyed Khadaffi’s air force, so they sold them to their fellow islamofascists in Afghanistan. Apparently, a missile that shot down a US helicopter in Afghanistan was traced back as one of those Obama-sold missiles. Multiple US servicemen were killed in that shootdown. That sale was incompetent at minimum, and arguably a crime. Flynn would have known about this, if true.

      Liked by 8 people

    • DaughterofLiberty says:

      Well, just remember McCabe’s supposed famous quote: “First we f@#& Flynn and then we f@#& Trump.”

      Liked by 13 people

    • Kaco says:

      That reminds me of the tragic incident early on in Pres Trump’s administration where we tried a surprise operation that ended with our men being killed. It was thought that somehow ISIS was tipped off. I wonder what came of that.

      I can’t even find an article about it right now, and hard to run through my myriad of bookmarks, but I know Sundance did post about it. Wasn’t that an attempted air raid?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jimmy Jack says:

        Yes. I remember what you’re talking about and probably bookmarked it too. It was IIRC the first military death in Trump’s administration and it came as a surprise.

        My guess is this is tied to that. I’d like to see Trump’s remarks about it at the time bc w hindsight they are probably very telling.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Kaco says:

          Thanks for remembering, it was quite an incident, and yes, I remember our President seemingly very disturbed. I don’t know what ever came of it, if they were able to find out if there was a rat.

          Liked by 1 person

      • “And, just a few weeks after the fact, it appears we know why Tillerson was so quick to purge existing staffers: he just didn’t trust them. It also appears his mistrust was more than justified. On January 29th, United States Special Forces executed an operation inside Yemen, against al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), with the aim of gathering intelligence and killing leaders of the group. The raid was planned under the Obama administration, but the decision to execute the raid was “punted” to Trump, using the pretext of waiting for a “low loom” (moonless) night to execute the raid with maximum secrecy:

        While the operation had been proposed, it was never green-lighted. Kahl said Obama felt going the mission would mark a “significant escalation” in Yemen and should be left to the next administration to decide……“Obama … believed this represented a significant escalation of U.S. involvement in Yemen…

        While the commandos did everything necessary to maintain the element of surprise, it appears as though AQAP adversaries on the ground had advance warning of the at

        Liked by 4 people

      • ann says:

        My recollection is we lost men in Yemen shortly after. POTUS took office.


      • ann says:

        I recall reading that the losses were in Yemen., Kaco. If that helps.


    • Jimmy Jack says:

      I suspect something equally as shocking – Flynn knee all about weapons (& likely other illegal) ratlines that have been running for years which facilitates black ops and provide dark money. This would certainly tie to the situation in Benghazi because that’s exactly what it was.

      My question about Barr at this point is if he’s willing to expose this which is definitely a scandal almost beyond belief to keep an even bigger scandal going back years and over servers administrations.

      What I’m waiting for them to try to smear Flynn with any ties to Fetah Gulen. But what I’m guessing is possible, if Gulen is an issue at all, if that Flynn saw the trap that was laid for him and his son and has one of his own for Obama and Hillary.

      Liked by 1 person

    • YeahYouRight says:

      Flynn would have stopped the fake collusion case against Trump, would have seen and exposed the FISA abuse. That’s why he was targeted in this case.

      Bengazhi and personal animus aside, he was between Trump and 0bama, so he had to go.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Brewerbear says:



    • bill johnston says:

      “In due time”??? Hurry up. I am 81 yo and don’t have much time.

      Liked by 8 people

  3. BoreMole says:

    QUICK EVERYONE! the peasants no longer buy the wuflu panic porn, and the greatest political scandal in US history is finally seeing some daylight – do we have any RACISM stories we can redirect their outrage to for awhile????

    Liked by 10 people

    • Jimmy Jack says:

      Yes, poor Georgia is about to be Fergusoned and Brunswick Trayyvon Martined. They are going to punish Kemp for opening up and CAIR massive social unrest in an election year. Now convenient.

      MSM has done a good job covering up the violent criminal past of Ahmaud. Thankfully web sleuths are exposing it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • BoreMole says:

        Haven’t seen any of that new info yet, but learned long ago that the first, salacious, CNN version is seldom the final version. Were it exactly as stated and portrayed, I would happily join those demanding justice. Usually, you can tell how real it is by who lines up to screech about it.


      • swissik says:

        Well after seeing the video, it sure doesn’t look good for the accused dad and son. Just because somebody has a criminal past doesn’t make it acceptable for these two to take the law in their own hands.


    • RJ says:

      Yea, I am white, a WASP and made my own concoction of disinfectant using Clorox beach plus some other secret ingredients.

      My hands and face have not gotten whiter! Must be a racist formula in that bleach…damn those corporate BLM people, it ain’t fair man!


    • Joemama says:

      They haven’t triggered an MKUltra victim into doing a mass shooting for a while. They might pull that one out again to change the MSM news focus.

      The cultural marxists will be making another attempt to disarm the public, so you know that they will do another mass shooting false flag at some point.

      Commies can’t take over unless their opposition is disarmed.


  4. More winning..!

    Supreme Court grants Trump request to temporarily shield Mueller grand jury materials

    Liked by 8 people

    • waterthelibertytree01 says:

      That’s winning because that Mueller Grand Jury is all rolled into a Durham Grand Jury. The SC seems to have been made aware of that…… Just my opinion of course!!

      Weissman has what’s coming to him

      Liked by 5 people

  5. biff0101 says:

    Very interesting! Is there hope for Barr yet?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jimmy Jack says:

      See my comment above. Is Barr willing to expose one major scandal to cover for an even bigger one? He’d come out looking like a hero while still being a hero to the swamp. Idk, definitely a possibility especially given my suspicion of him seeing that his father is thee who employed Jeffrey Epstein T exclusive Dalton school as a math teacher with no college degree.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. biff0101 says:

    Very interesting! Is there hope for Barr yet?


  7. James Kelly says:

    Now Trump should nominate General Flynn as director of the FBI.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Munchenfez says:

    So will the Kenyan get to meet Jack Ketch?


  9. Bubby says:

    Based on the responses from Democrats, corrupt msm and various Lawfare participants to the Barr interview and the release of the 53 House interviews it seems that violating the Constitutional rights of American citizens who disagree with them is not violating any real laws. It’s become the morally correct thing to do to destroy President Trump, WTP, conservatives and Christians even if laws are twisted, bent or violated! Ideology over truth, motive over law and party over country! God help us how can we live in peace with the radical leftists running the Democrat Party, the corrupt msm, the DOJ/FBI/IC and the Judicial system? Someone tell me please!

    Liked by 3 people

    • ltravisjr says:

      First and foremost, the mainstream media must be repudiated such that the general public sees it for what it is and wholly turns elsewhere for its information, and can find and trust a nonbiased alternative rather than simply a substitute that caters to their own preconceived notions. When the approval of Cuomo can skyrocket while DeDantis’ approval can fall given the results of their responses, or when the president can see far lower approvals than Dem governors despite himself encouraging shutdowns and flooding the country with aid money – you know it can only be due to the MSM’s influence because logic doesn’t apply otherwise.

      Dems will be dems and push the line as far as they are able and communists will always pop up and do what they do. The country will always have them and it can deal with them – so long as the public sees what’s going on. Its the media that’s the real danger. The MSM must be rejected. The question is how…

      Liked by 7 people

      • yy4u says:

        The FBI needs to be dismantled and reconstituted as a real investigative agency, not as a political arm of the Democrat Party.

        The CIA needs a chief who will root out the bad apples and turn them into apple cider.

        The IRS needs to be overhauled and the Lois Lerners transferred to other departments if they cannot be fired. Or if they can’t be transferred allowed to work at IRS but only at entry level positions (no matter the seniority and wages they are paid).

        Congress needs to pass legislation
        1) That media cannot publish or air names of accused UNTIL and UNLESS the accused are indicted. No more “guilt by accusation” as Alan Dershowitz puts it. Punishable by a large fine to the corporate holding and jail time of thirty days for the reporter/anchor who aired/printed the accusation. Don Lemon might well end up serving a life sentence if the thirty days are not served concurrently.

        2) That media CAN be sued for libel by an injured party. A future General Flynn should be allowed to sue every media entity that lied about him for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

        If we don’t do these things, we’ll be right where we are now after another eight years of a Democrat administration. It’s like trying to reform Lenin’s KGB or Hitler’s Gestapo by leaving the guilty agents in place.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Your last three sentences sum it up accurately: “Its the media that’s the real danger. The MSM must be rejected. The question is how…”

        Nice job.


        Liked by 3 people

      • Joemama says:

        “The question is how”

        Prosecution under RICO comes to mind …


        • ltravisjr says:

          Yeah and then the question becomes who covers it and how do they cover it – because that’s what will inform the public’s response. If, say, the public is told this is actually treason on the other side and they aren’t inspired to critical thought towards what *should* be clear truth…we have a problem.


      • JayKay says:

        “The question is how?”

        Isn’t it obvious? Someone just needs to start a real, actual, factual, open-source media broadcasting company that just, relays the information honestly. the market is there. be a good business, attract customers. make the MSM look obsolete. present the news in a non clickbaity-advertising driven way.

        why has nobody done this yet?

        Liked by 1 person

        • ltravisjr says:

          That would be ideal. The question is how to mobilize towards it and protects outs integrity. For instance, I don’t know how Wikipedia started but I thought in theory it was open source publicly contributed, free, etc. However, when I look up articles based on the politics of the day invariably the sources are NYT, WaPo, and CNN. The “other side” seems to have taken it over and now that is the defacto information and history repository for the average American. How would a free open source information news organization avoid the same fate?


    • Dee says:

      They will drive us to civil war.


  10. If you’re wondering the background on what event Comey, McCabe, Yates, McCord, et al, used to ‘get Flynn fired’ it has been previously explained very well by Sundance (and, it makes more sense than ever).

    Scroll down and start reading the part about Mike Pence’s appearance on Face the Nation.

    Basically, Mike Pence fell right into John Dickerson’s trap, the VP got defensive and blurted out a nonsense answer. This all put Flynn in the bad position of having to thread a needle and the fire-Flynn cabal jumped all over it. It’s an Occam’s razor type thing.

    And, no, I’m not throwing Pence himself under the bus….. the media was working in tandem with McCabe, et al, and would have found someone high up in the Administration to get their dander up like Pence did and spit out a defensive-type statement that didn’t reflect reality.

    What AG Barr says right here is what VP Pence should have said back to John Dickerson:

    “Let me say that, at that point, he was the designated national security adviser for President-Elect Trump, and was part of the transition, which is recognized by the government and funded by the government as an important function to bring in a new administration. And it is very typical, very common for the national security team of the incoming president to communicate with foreign leaders.

    And that call, there was nothing wrong with it whatever. In fact, it was laudable. He– and it was nothing inconsistent with the Obama administration’s policies. And it was in U.S. interests. He was saying to the Russians, you know, “Don’t escalate.” And they asked him if he remembered saying that, and he said he didn’t remember that.”

    Liked by 3 people

    • BTW, you can hear Yates and McCord in Don McGahn’s office like a couple of little school girls….. McGahn – why are you concerned if one member of the cabinet lies to another member?

      Yates/McCord…. nnyyyaaaaa nnnyyyyaaaaa boo boo, it’s a LOT more than that!!!! he liiiiieeeeeeddddd to Peter Strzk and ANDY said so! nnnnnyyyyyyaaaaa nnnnnyyyyyaaaaa boo boo

      Liked by 2 people

    • DaughterofLiberty says:

      Yes, but a dumb boner by Pence nonetheless. Given his experience with politically charged interviews he should have known better what to look for and how to handle it. He was needlessly defensive and this was a huge gift to the conspiracy that was by then underway.

      Liked by 7 people

      • Don’t disagree. Navigating this kind of BS is why an experienced guy like Mike Pence was hired in the first place. He should have smelled this hack reporter out and owned the downside. Dumb move on his part.

        Liked by 6 people

        • MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

          I don’t believe Mike Pence can see smart from his seat in the stands. Trump was pretty much saddled with the guy due to the republican click. I will assume he is Trump’s guy for 2020 but it wouldn’t bother me if someone took his place.

          Liked by 5 people

      • negasht7 says:



      • regitiger says:

        Spoiler: pence is about as sharp as a brick. He was picked to ellicit evangelical voters. Period.

        Pence requires a teleprompter when he is talking to himself.

        Now that Trump has the next cycle in the bag, he needs to replace his VP. And not a moment too soon either.

        Pence is a squealer. I know a squealer when i see one. Pence is a squealer.


    • Linda Wood says:

      Is this what is understood to be the lie that Michael Flynn supposedly admitted to?
      “And they asked him if he remembered saying that, and he said he didn’t remember that.”

      This has been the most intriguing thing about the case for me – what was he supposed to have lied about? As a supporter of Gen. Flynn’s opposition to our treasonous policy of arming ISIS and Al Qaeda, I have wondered what he could conceivably have lied about in that interview. Was it that he said he didn’t remember saying something that he actually did remember saying?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Beau Geste says:

        Remember all the times the obama-administration witnesses (just released), and the wicked witch hillary, said they don’t remember?
        I do, but not any of the entertainment media-owned news dependent on china for revenue.
        (They aren’t a ‘free press’ – the giant global entertainment media should be required to spin off their news divisions to shareholders)

        Liked by 1 person

      • regitiger says:

        given what we KNOW about Gen Flynn exemplary record.

        given what we KNOW about the corrupt motives and criminalality created by FBI/CIA OP to attempt a coup with all manner of direct misconduct before the fisa court and then later in the Flynn court

        isn’t the answer clearly that the so called investigators created the lie. it was certainly a trap. it doesn’t take a leap or to suspend disbelief they recorded whatever they wanted about the interview.

        if you notice several contradictions from even Comey on multiple accounts in the media.. and now supported by the recently released fbi charge material…all points lead that it wasnt even a question about what flynn said.

        all points lead that the fbi rewrote a manufactured account sugh that they could go forward and pursue the case ..

        remember…this was a strategy to do several corrupt acts

        a. see if pressuring flynn wpuld compel him to flip…making him fbi team player towards another goal of taking down the president…at least to gain inside compromat as the administration moved forward.

        b. if flynn refused… proceed to destroy him… this was ultimately the highest priority because flynn left in the wild, even if he agreed to play ball was known to be highly motivated to weed out corruption in the IC… holdovers from the Obama regime could never allow him to have access and power to swing his wrecking ball.

        c. it was also done masterfully as median psyops mission. Russia Russia. all that nonsense of former fisa warrants predicated (fraudulently) on the contrived narrative the ic had already fabricated. what better way to protect against that corrupt criminal charade and hoax than to introduce the very guy who would expose that as… yes you guessed it..some kind of kremlin actor!!

        the best possible way to describe the flynn interview is the same way we we KNOW these same actors had performed

        they just made shit up.

        that’s the story.

        don’t be confused about this.

        the bar actors and the complicit press are going to continue to distract you away from the motives and criminal acts of the IC. they want you to sniff around Flynn’s interview and want you to contemplate THAT.

        recognize this is THEIR FRAUD!

        Flynn simply could not overcome the ultimate power these corruptors had established over him. they sunk him. financially and “legally”. he did more than anyone could in his position. it was no longer about him..they had his family in the crosshairs. corruptly…he knew it… but he knew he could not win. it didn’t help his own defense was corrupt too. impossible situation.

        they set him up…1000 ways to sunday…full on.

        you know what i love the most about his tragic predicament?

        sidney powell… patriot extraoidinare.

        and sundance!!!

        both regarded in my book as narional treasures… citizen warriors of historic even biblical proportions.

        I’m not kidding either. or exaggerating.

        the level of performance by these two honorable people will be recorded in the book as some of the most crucial and supremely important efforts in American history. it is from their work and the people that supported then directly that we the people have a clear indisputable fact based trail of crimes within our central government.

        what WE DO with thos knowledge will determine the course of American destiny.

        its just that critical we do not waste this moment and make our power over the corrupt state very real.

        there is much work to be done.

        now of the time to begin that work.

        it starts by forcing leadership to aim high and wide and punish those that have committed crimes against our republic…US!

        and then move to kill the 702 and patriot act and dismantle the spying apparatus, people in it, hardware, and budgets with the most severe criminal penalties to ANYONE spying on American citizens.

        we want the 4th restored AND PROTECTED.

        we will have to force these requirements on the state.

        that’s the mission.

        general flynn case will be remembered as the catalyst for this revolutionary correction.

        spread the word.

        make what ought to be
        what is.


    • paper doll says:

      imo Pence is a cog in the deep state gears,(like everyone else ) who does what he is told. Not a free agent to make moves on his own or mistakes. He was told to start the ” get Flynn “operation by asking about the phone call. Has anyone asked him how he even knew of the call? If the answer is that was part of his role as VP , to know about it…then why did he need to ask\ confront Flynn about it, in a hall way was it? If it was his business to know, wouldn’t he be briefed and ask his questions then?

      Liked by 3 people

  11. Julia Adams says:

    A marvelous tribute to Sidney Powell:

    Liked by 6 people

  12. lfhbrave says:

    “I think that is something that Robert Mueller was responsible for looking at under his charter, which is the potential of Russian influence. But I think it was ignored and there was mounting indications that this could very well have been happening and no one really stopped to look at it.”

    After identifying the Russian disinformation in Steele dossier as being troubling, he lays the groundwork for letting Mueller and his gang off the hook.


    • frances says:

      Or could it just be a version of, “Softly, softly catche monkey”? Might be better than, yes I am going to nail the SOB to a wall, just a thought:)


      • Ninja7 says:

        frances, Like the saying goes “One can catch more flies with honey, than with vinegar “🤔

        We all have different perspectives, insights, so we are able to weigh what we see and come to our own conclusions. Not that we are so stuck, That we will never change our views, when presented with additional information. (Depending upon the source of the information).🤔🤔

        Love Sundance and the CTH Community, As stated multiple times, Once you see the strings attached to the marionette it becomes impossible to be unseen. Thanks for the enlightenment.

        Liked by 3 people

  13. Tom Hansen says:

    Catherine Herridge is probably the most respected journalist in the DC swamp media, so I wonder how she feels about her new employer, CBS, brutally editing this interview for airing. Her work at FNC was exceptional and was always given wide latitude with her reporting. She may be feeling some regret going over to CBS, knowing that they are undercutting her reporting.

    Liked by 4 people

  14. I remember intuitively knowing at the time all this was going on that the Obama Administration was playing a very dangerous political game with all this Russia nonsense. The Atlantic Council, New Republic and National Review (Scowcroft, Farkas, French, Krystal, Boot, etc) scumbags provided a lot of cover too.

    At the end of the day, b/c Barack Obama knew his cover was about to get blown, the fool came perilously close to starting an armed conflict with Russia (and who knows who else would have gotten sucked in). We all owe General Flynn a debt of gratitude for diplomatically managing through this with his Russian counterparts and de-escalating the foolishness of Obama, McCabe, Rice, Biden, Comey, Brennan, Page, Yates, et al.

    Liked by 5 people

  15. RedNeckJohnGalt says:

    May the POTUS, as Commander in Chief, order / direct a counter intelligence investigation at any time against any US citizen? Must such an order be in writing? Will the persecutors of Flynn ultimately place an order signed by Obama on the table?


  16. Kaco says:

    “But if, you know, if we were to find wrongdoing, in the sense of any criminal act, you know, obviously we would, we would follow through on that. But, again, you know, just because something may even stink to high heaven and be, you know, appear everyone to be bad we still have to apply the right standard and be convinced that there’s a violation of a criminal statute. And that we can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The same standard applies to everybody.”

    I would hope that at least those people that “stink to high heaven” would be fired for ethical reasons.

    Aren’t the Ohrs still working there?

    The country’s justice is in his hands. We can only hope and pray.

    Liked by 3 people

    • regitiger says:

      the countries justice is NOT in his hands. that power remains fully in we the people hands.

      as it has always been codified by the very protected natural rights set by GOD and enumerated by the Constitution of this republic!

      never forget the power YOU HAVE.



  17. brenrod says:

    Wray is part of the problem, its transparently obvious: he is either complicit in stalling or incompetent as a director. No one should have “confidence” in Wray! Barr is wrong when he says it is not the directors responsibility to see the documents produced: this and related cases are at the top of priority as they involve the appearance, if not the actuality, of sedition and treason.
    Same is true of Mueller, he is complicit or incompetent, I say complicit.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Beau Geste says:

      Agreed, as a famous (but relatively honest) democrat saud, “the buck stops here”.
      Wray can’t possibly deny knowing about Sidney Powell’s briefs, requests for records, or HID DOJ’s denial of any records. Wray can’t possibly not know about the potential for distrust of ‘his institution’ if it was shown that the FBI was rooked, lying, continuing to lie, and continuing to hide records. Impossible.

      If he did not have any inkling that this demanded his attention, he needs to be fired for incompetence. If he did, he is complicit, and needs to be disciplined by judge sullivan, and then prosecuted.

      Liked by 1 person

    • DeWalt says:

      Barr’s comment flies in the face of Wray’s comments. Wray stated that they turned the exculpatory evidence over first to Horowitz then to Durham. This shows that Wray was acutely aware of the evidence in question. Next, if Horowitz had this evidence it was not in his report. WHY. and didn’t Wray sign off on the reports accuracy? Something tells me Durham is the one who clued Flynn’s defense that these doc’s existed. Lot’s to still be explained.

      Liked by 3 people

      • deeperinfo says:

        We don’t know when it was turned over to Durham.
        I don’t trust Wray (Ha, it autospelled his name after “I don’t trust”), however it is possible the info was hidden from him. We don’t know, yet, when he got it.
        Barr And Durham do. Maybe it was hidden from him until Jensen found it?
        Like Chinese Wuhan influenza; We Don’t Know (yet!).

        Three choices: Co-Conspirator; lawbreaker without knowledge of Conspiracy; or Dupe.
        {May overlay}

        Liked by 1 person

        • You may have a found a hidden gem in your analysis. We “expect” the heads of the agencies to know everything, however, as you mentioned, there “may” be people within the organizations that are withholding the info from them.

          Good catch. But…………I still don’t trust Wray.


          Liked by 2 people

          • deeperinfo says:

            I can’t keep all the names and details straight with so many co-conspirators, but I recall that some documents in an FBI office were placed in a different file cabinet and only discovered by mistake (Ryecki? sp) during a search. It was done in such a way it was not supposed to be found…
            The Seventh Floor did this in reverse: they took on cases that field agents would normally handle so they could keep the non-corrupt FBI agents from finding out. A rumor was floated that Durham was disappointed that no FBI whistle blowers stepped up – I think it was because of the tightest control of information by the top FBI co-conspirators.


    • California Joe says:

      It’s the FBI Director’s responsibility to see that his agents don’t hide exculpatory evidence or even worse evidence that his agency tried to frame the President of the United States for a crime that never even happened!

      Liked by 2 people

  18. Jimmy Jack says:

    This furthers my long running strong suspicions of Pence. Wasn’t it Pence he was accused of lying to in the early stages of this? If so Pence must have known he was part of the trap and willingly played his role.

    I’d love to hear Sundance’s perspective on this. I haven’t been able to Treep as much as I was bc I’m taking care of my sister who was diagnosed with a rare form of leukemia. I’m thankful to be back for a moment here today and seeing such a positive update to this long running criminal scandal.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Kaco says:

      Oh, my goodness, and at such a time. I pray she has successful treatment. It’s a blessing you are able to be of help to her.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Jimmy Jack says:

        Thank you. It had been a challenge beyond words. She was in NYC when she was diagnosed and I live in Texas. I went to take care of her and during that first month I knew it was getting hairy in NYC and we had to get out. As soon as she was released I rented a car and got her to our other sister’s home in NC to start treatment at Duke bc the NY doctors said Houston was too far from Austin to make her treatment work. So now we’re in NC (which is far more liberal than I realized it had gotten) and have to move into an apartment for her transplant anyway so we could have just gone to Texas. Idk why we’re here now but I trust God has a plan. Now we’re held up on her transplant donation being able to be shipped into the US from Europe bc if Covid. Smh. Praying for miracles here daily.

        I haven’t followed the Covid talk here much since the shutdowns started but can offer this – what I have seen at both hospitals is nothing like what I’m seeing reported in the news. The testing tents are empty, the hospitals quiet. I just don’t think the reality is anything like what is being sold to the public by the MSM or left wing pols.

        Liked by 1 person

    • FH says:

      Pence is not trustworthy and never has been. A certain demographic is in love with him because of his faith, yet he’d sell out Trump in a heartbeat – and I don’t think it would take thirty silver pieces.

      Liked by 3 people

    • WSB says:

      Prayers for you, Jimmy Jack.


      • Jimmy Jack says:

        Thank you. We truly appreciate it. We lost our Dad to cancer 3 years ago and our mother twenty years ago to cancer. I can’t lose my sister to it too.

        Liked by 1 person

        • WSB says:

          I know this seems overwhelming, but we are all right here. And there may be a lot more hope in medications.

          My sister in law, her father, mother, and father’s second wife all passed due to this illness.

          They all lived in Oyster Bay, LI…and I often wondered if there was an underlying cause in the area.


    • regitiger says:

      we have added you and sister name on our daily prayer book.

      God bless


  19. 4E Douglas says:

    I think that there is some game afoot. and Barr is not one to telegraph his punches.

    Liked by 4 people

    • hokkoda says:

      Yep, you’re right. He says in the interview the Jensen is going to be tasked to look into other things. Most likely: Stone, Papadopolous, Manafort, and very likely the Mueller prosecutors in general. I think as part of that, Jensen will find that FBI Dir. Wray was complicit in the coverup of these exculpatory materials in the Flynn case.

      I think they’re also going to tie a bow around how FISA was used to set up all of these indictments and prosecutions.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Beau Geste says:

        They need to tie a prosecution on the FISA judges who refuse to protect civil rights of unrepresented defendants (the only reason the court exists !), who accept a deceitful, INDIRECT, unconstitutional “2-hop” Warrant to spy on a PRESIDENT without his being named a ‘target’ with Constitutional Due Process. And Separation of Powers issues. And without even asking to see Woods verification of fake-on-their-face allegations. The FISC continues to protect the deniers of civil rights by refusing to withdraw all their fake Warrants, and refusing to discipline the liars, oath-fakers who signed the Warrants, and unethical attorneys who withheld information from the record.

        The FISC judges who perpetrated this fraud, and continue to perpetrate it and protect the coup plotters, need to be impeached for lack of ‘Good Behavior’ required by the Constitution for continued judicial service.

        Liked by 5 people

  20. hokkoda says:

    Two pieces of this I took extra note of, emphasis added.

    First, Jeff Jensen is not finished. I think this is an indication that Jensen is going to be looking at the conduct of the prosecutors in this particular case. And, that Jensen is now being directed to look at Papadopolous, Manafort, and Stone were handed by the Mueller investigation:

    BARR: Well, you know, I don’t wanna, you know, we’re in the middle of looking at all of this. John Durham’s investigation, and U.S. Attorney Jensen, I’m gonna ask him to do some more work on different items as well. And I’m gonna wait till all the evidence is, and I get their recommendations as to what they found and how serious it is.

    Second, and this is important to reinforce with people you talk to: Even if they believe Flynn lied to the FBI, the bigger issue is whether or not prosecutors have the right to withhold – even deny the existence of – evidence that would affect a defendant’s legal position or plea. The mere existence of these documents is an indictment of Mueller, Weissman, Van Grack, and others. They trampled on his rights.

    Q: Before we move on to some separate questions, many of these records should have been provided to Flynn’s defense team long ago.

    It is now accepted truth that the DOJ withheld critical information from a defendant. That’s both good news and frightening news. Sadly, in answering this question, it’s clear that Barr is sticking with Wray for the foreseeable future. I think if Jensen comes back with evidence that Wray was clearly and directly complicit in covering up this new evidence (he was, Jensen will have no trouble finding it), that’s when Chris Wray will be sent packing.

    I sense that Barr is trying to do this in a way that sidesteps the political land mines and produces evidence that drives a resignation rather than a firing.

    Liked by 6 people

  21. X XYZ says:

    “BARR: Yeah, as I’ve said, you know, he’s [Wray] been a great partner to me in our effort to restore the American people’s confidence in both the Department of Justice and the FBI.”

    This shows Barr’s priorities. His primary priority is to convince the American people and attempt to restore their faith in the FBi, the CIA, the DOJ, etc.This will be done as it always is, with flowery rhetoric, letting them down slowly. All politicians and diplomatic administrators do this.Barr is no exception. It’s part of their public relations routine.

    Barr’s secondary priority is to prosecute those who can be prosecuted successfully. Unfortunately, lawyers who are good at their trade always think like their opposition in playing “devil’s advocate” – by imagining everything that might derail their case. Clients often find that maddening, as when taken to the extreme it can signal that the lawyer is defending the opposition – or not really interested in vigorously defending the client. And that might be the case.

    My guess is that eventually a few of the smaller fish might be prosecuted and as always, the bigger fish will escape the dragnet. That’s the way it has always happened since the Nixon administration. I don’t expect it will be any different this time – even though an attempted coup is much more serious and unprecedented. And yes, the two-tiered justice system will remain intact, regardless of what happens or despite what anyone in the bureaucracy, the administration or in political office says to convince us otherwise..

    Liked by 1 person

    • mimbler says:

      Well, PDJT was impeached, so it doesn’t look like big fish are exempt. Just democrat big fish. And DOJ had all this exculpatory evidence for PDJT, and stood silent watching the lies of the impeachment unfold.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Beau Geste says:

        Excellent observation, mimbler

        AGBarr and his beloved henchman Wray just kept the evidence in their top desk drawer, away from prying eyes, until Sidney Powell got too close for comfort.

        Liked by 5 people

        • Super elite covfefe999 loves her President! says:

          Do you really think it was in Barr’s top desk drawer?

          It’s all so simple to you armchair AGs. lol

          Liked by 2 people

          • Beau Geste says:

            Yes, I do. Barr claims his job is to restore public confidence. Hiding evidence from defendants, and “fabricating crimes” in a very public case, is directly Barr’s business. Van Grack is a known loose cannon. mewler is a known hider of exculpatory evidence when wrong people are jailed.
            This is on Barr’s watch. So, he must necessarily have said to his beloved henchman Wray, “Are we clean on this Flynn case? Check out anything that can bite us in the a$$. This Powell woman has some connections and will likely dig up some dirt if it is there. Somebody already gave her the serial numbers of the Mifsud cell phones we used to spy on papadoc”

            So, they were either in Barr’s top drawer, or Wray’s ‘top drawer’. “Top drawer” is just a trial lawyer phrase for ‘hidden away”. I once had a federal case with over 100,000 pages hidden away by opposing counsel, while they lied to the judge ‘we have produced everything”. Which of course was all the most devastating evidence imaginable, and destroyed their case. In litigation, you can mostly ignore the forst records produced. Typically, the harder the fight to prevent evidence, the worse the evidence for the hiding party.

            There is no doubt in my mind that Barr and Wray knew they had a very real problem with mewler/vanGrack, which Grennell forced then to face up to, so they could not keep stalling and hiding.

            Liked by 1 person

        • “he’s [Wray] been a great partner to me” means to me “he HAS been a…..” not “he IS a…..”

          Perhaps AG Barr has him on a shorter leash that we think.


      • X XYZ says:

        That was somewhat different in that the Democrat controlled congress wrote the articles of impeachment, and nothing, including the DOJ, could stop them from doing so. As has been said, an impeachment is not really a trial as we know it – it’s more of a political showdown, or a witch hunt..

        Liked by 1 person

        • mimbler says:

          DOJ couldn’t have prevented it, I’ll agree. But their silence while holding info that was exculpatory for PDJT was inexcusable IMO.


          • PA96er says:

            At the risk of sounding clueless…. What info did the DOJ withhold related to the Ukraine impeachment? I’ve followed CTH since the Trayvon days so I’ve stayed mostly informed of all things Trump drama related. What am I forgetting?

            Liked by 1 person

            • mimbler says:

              You are right. I think I was conflating the endless Russian collusion accusations that lasted well after the Mueller report, but the actual impeachment charges were based on Ukraine, and DOJ/FBI wouldn’t have had any knowledge of that.

              That major point aside, I think my concern remains that DOJ had info that the public statements by officials regarding Russian collusion were factually incorrect, and allowed them to stand uncorrected.


              • PA96er says:

                Definitely a valid concern. It really gets difficult to keep track of all of the dastardly deeds soooooo many of these scumbags engaged in. Everyday that I learn more of what happened, I think of the line in Walter Scott’s poem Marmion “Oh, what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive!”.

                Liked by 1 person

    • Super elite covfefe999 loves her President! says:

      This shows Barr’s priorities. His primary priority is to convince the American people and attempt to restore their faith in the FBi, the CIA, the DOJ, etc.

      You have to ignore just about everything Barr has done to make that kind of a statement.

      Pushing Mueller to wrap up the witch hunt and then coming forward immediately to release the summary telling everyone that Mueller was a flop is no attempt to restore anyone’s faith in anything. Nor is making a very explicit statement that Trump was spied on. Nor is freeing Flynn. etc etc etc.

      Liked by 2 people

      • X XYZ says:

        My comment is based upon Barr’s statement (which you might be ignoring). He sees that mission as part of his appointment. It’s my opinion that it is his primary concern, to restore confidence in those agencies. Many in this forum have advocated demolishing them completely. Perhaps your defense should be directed toward that more radical position.

        My point is that even if those who were the “dirty cops”, most of whom were/are at the highest levels are removed, these agencies will remain vulnerable to this happening again. After this whole scandal over, we will then be told that everything is back to normal. Barr admits that restoring “confidence” in those agencies is in his purview. That will be administrative persuasion to convince we the governed. But nothing will be done to guarantee that this will never happen again. If I sound like Trump in desiring that more important objective, I’ll take that as a compliment.

        Liked by 2 people

        • nimrodman says:

          Making sure “this will never happen again” (TM) is a laudable future goal

          My more immediate concern, however, is that punishment and retribution be brought to those who made it happen “this time”

          First things first – it’s a simple concept

          Punishment first – lofty goals later

          Liked by 1 person

          • nimrodman says:

            … sorry, I was needlessly wish-washy

            “Punishment and disembowelment first – lofty goals later”


          • X XYZ says:


            But since America often all too willingly slides reflexively into “blanket forgiveness”. Based upon past history we can expect that “by the end of the day” (I hate that phrase!) the perps will “have suffered enough” and be given only a slap on the wrist at most. The mindset of social liberalism has taken over religion. Application of any punishment at all is now considered harsh, cruel, and unusual. Don’t mention retribution. Unless you want to be called a NAZI.

            If it were you, me or anyone who is not in a government position, we’d be doing jail time for any infraction after a very brief, speedy and unjust trial. Just like Ms. Luther.

            The two-tiered system of justice in America is exactly that.Those who have government positions, the “untouchables”, are first class citizens, and the rest of us are the underclass.


            Liked by 1 person

    • “he’s [Wray] been a great partner to me” means to me “he HAS been a…..” not “he IS a…..”

      Perhaps AG Barr has him on a shorter leash that we think.


  22. Sounds like Yates is gonna skate…

    Liked by 1 person

    • waterthelibertytree01 says:

      looks can be deceiving. She will make a deal for something light but no one is getting away from the clink… opinion of course


    • California Joe says:

      Sounds more like Yates is a witness for the prosecution and that’s very good news!


  23. wtd says:

    Flynn Was Innocent All Along: He Was Pressured to Plead Guilty

    “Moreover, in this case, it is alleged that the government threatened, if Flynn did not plead guilty, to indict his son. These are the kinds of pressures routinely used by prosecutors.”

    Legal officials (like Dershowitz stated in the above linked article) say the setup, entrapment and bludgeoning tactics used against #MichaelFlynn are ROUTINELY used against others. If true, our whole system is rotten and a systematic overhaul is needed

    Liked by 4 people

    • Beau Geste says:

      That should be recognized as extortion under color of law, and be prosecuted.

      Isn’t that how the dems got Bernie to drop out agsinst the wicked witch hillary in 2016? Threaten to indict his wife for theft from her college finances?
      Door #1, no jail plus a house
      Door #2, ‘Big House’ for your wife ,no house for you.

      Liked by 1 person

    • deeperinfo says:

      Except, in the Flynn case, the FBI and DOJ knew he was innocent, so the coercion was criminal, not typical.
      Small diff, no?

      Liked by 2 people

  24. Bogeyfree says:

    First question…..

    Has anyone called the DOJ today and ask to speak to Van Grack?

    2nd question……..

    In Barr’s two different stints at the head of the DOJ has he every indicted anyone within the DOJ ever?

    Answer is nope and I don’t see ANYONE in the DOJ current administration or past administration going down.

    In the end the greatest tragedy will be IMO Barr and Durham not prosecuting this as a massive conspiracy to take down a sitting President and to lower it to a few missteps by some FIB agents who didn’t follow Procedure.

    Liked by 2 people

    • yy4u says:

      Bogeyfree —
      It all depends on how pi$$ed they think we are. If they think we’ll go back to sleep, then it will be a few missteps by some FBI agents who didn’t follow Procedure. If they think we the people have awakened, then they’ll throw us a few bones to shut us up. No way to know now which it’ll be.

      Barr is a good man but his first loyalty is to government which he sees as indistinguishable from “the country”.. Dr. Codevilla described perfectly “the country class” and the “ruling class” (Dr Angela Codevilla’s “The Ruling Class and the Perils of Revolution”

      Donald Trump’s election was the “revolution”.

      Liked by 2 people

  25. Kaco says:

    I haven’t heard a lot of talk since the charges were dropped about the reason Gen Flynn plead guilty was due to them threatening his son. Did I miss something?

    Liked by 1 person

    • hokkoda says:

      I think they needed to stick to the core of the prosecution: the lack of a legit investigation, and the DOJs inability to confirm the veracity of the only piece of evidence Flynn lied…the 302.

      Jensen gave the judge information on Covington’s side deal. It’s clear Jensen thinks something happened there. DOJ is better off not going there just yet. And I bet this issue is already in Jensen’s job jar going forward.

      Liked by 1 person

  26. Bogeyfree says:

    So if you are Durham, knowing that Flynn’s case has been tossed wouldn’t you immediately set up an interview with him to learn everything he knows and query him why the prior administration was so intent to shut him up?

    Kind of like would you have jumped on the first plane to go depose Assange the first week you were put on the case considering Assange is a first hand witness how Wikileaks got DNC emails?

    I’m back to give me Sidney as Justice Czar coupled with Grenell declassifying documents and maybe someone will see this for what it really was…….

    A planned coup to take down a Presidential candidate and then the sitting President of the United States of America.

    Liked by 3 people

  27. Doppler says:

    I’ve now read the DOJ Motion to Dismiss, and this transcript of Barr’s interview. What strikes me most, other than the warm glow of satisfaction at Flynn’s absolution, is what is missing: There is

    1. no mention of Sidney’s Motion to hold Van Gracken in contempt for repeated refusals to turn over Brady materials (which only came to light when USA Jensen took a fresh look), and repeated assurances that there were none,
    2. no mention of FARA and Covington’s role in representing Flynn, both for FARA registration and his criminal defense for lying to the FBI (what was dismissed here), and possible FARA criminal violations,
    3. any mention of Flynn’s son and the “attorneys’ agreement” not to prosecute the son but, instead, to file a false statement that there were no other agreements pertaining to the guilty plea, “to avoid de Giglio” obligations to disclose those other agreements in subsequent prosecutions where Flynn might be called as a witness for the prosecution.

    Together these three issues point to grave prosecutorial misconduct wholly unrelated to the basis so thoroughly, some might say, “tortuously” detailed in the motion to dismiss and Barr’s interview, namely that, after the FBI’s conclusion to close Crossfire Razor, aborted by Strzok for “7th floor” involvement, there was no viable predicate for the interview, no materiality to a valid investigation for the inconsistencies between Flynn’s statements about his recollection of his conversations with Kislyak and the transcripts themselves.

    So this leads me to speculate that these matters are the subject of other secret ongoing investigations that neither Barr, Jenson, Durham nor others at Justice are at liberty to discuss or mention.

    Do the final Mueller “Scope Memo” redactions also fall under this veil of secrecy?

    I believe, IIRC, either Sidney or Tom Fitton have sought Covington emails concerning Eric Holder’s involvement in the Flynn case.

    So, in that November 2017 timeframe,
    – that last scope memo seems likely to have authorized Mueller to go after Flynn, Jr. for FARA violations,
    – Covington
    – made a vague and inadequate oral disclosure of conflicts of interest to Flynn concerning their own involvement in FARA as witnesses,
    – advised Flynn to plead guilty to lying,
    – encouraged Flynn to spill dirt on Trump to the prosecutors,
    – reached an “attorney’s agreement” with Van Gracken, Weissman, and/or Mueller, to falsely assure the court that there were no other agreements concerning Flynn’s plea,
    – Flynn pled guilty, followed immediately by Strzok-buddy Judge Contrerez recusing himself and being replaced by Judge Emmet Sullivan, Sullivan issuing an explicit order to release all Brady materials.

    Durham’s investigation of whether Crossfire Hurricane was adequately predicated seems likely to have been expanded to look at whether those involved in opening it without adequate predicate were instead an organized crime unit pursuing unlawful use of national security surveillance activities for political and other unlawful purposes. I.e., the whole “slaughter Donald for his bromance with Putin” political strategy, the early 2016 work by Halper, Mifsud, Downer, et al, deploying CIA and FBI assets against Papadop, Carter Page, possibly Manafort in Ukraine, the reliance on Crowdstrike to blame the Russians, the “insurance policy,” the “resistance” effort that outlived the Obama Administration.

    Let’s hope someone is looking also at the snuffing of the Seth Rich murder and investigation of his laptop, the snuffing of the contents of the Weiner laptop, the snuffing of the Imran Awan affair involving access to Democrat Congressional computers, the Comey decision to snuff the MidYear Exam investigation of HRC’s server and its destruction, with no DOJ involvement, etc., etc., etc.

    Barr’s search for equal justice under the law, with single standards applied to everyone without political influence, won’t be successful unless it is all cleaned up.

    Liked by 3 people

    • deeperinfo says:

      Yes, those are very important violations. I’m guessing Barr avoided those three subjects as being part of an active investigation and not wanting to not prejudice the cases or bring claims of interference. He spoke to the case that was dismissed and spoke of equal justice to come through Durham and Jensen.

      Liked by 4 people

      • G. Alistar says:

        Yes, key point…“through investigators like Durham and Jensen.” Clever move that Barr is keeping at arms length in order to avoid the dishonest dems claiming he is making undue political influence. Ironically, with the hundreds of bitter, biased and inaccurate tweets by dems on social media, virtually NONE of them criticize Jensen??? He did the investigation and recommended DoJ drop the charges yet Barr is getting all the heat.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Mr e-man says:

      And the SSCI snuffing of the Wolfe prosecution. Which is key.

      Liked by 3 people

    • deeperinfo says:

      One more to add to your list:
      I heard that Covington never requested copies of the transcript so Flynn could confirm if he made a mistake (no opportunity to correct his mistake like Congress and DOJ let all the lawbreaker buddies and bosses do…).


  28. WhiteBoard says:

    espionage versus Treason.

    its clear the coup coordinated with IRAN (Hezbollah and Revolutionary Guard) and Pakastani ISI (AWAN Brothers) and Red China (Hillary’s server blind cc’d china firm, was duplicated by Human to Weiners laptop AKA AWAN).

    and obama and hillarys screwing around – had us lose control of 50 nuclear ICBMs in 2010 that was later blamed on a glitch or UFOs.


    • Doppler says:

      WhiteBoard – those are some very interesting connections. I’d forgotten about those ICBMs getting moved around. Not that I expect to know about such matters until public indictments or guilty pleas are announced, but I certainly hope it all hangs out.


  29. yy4u says:

    XXYZ said: “My guess is that eventually a few of the smaller fish might be prosecuted and as always, the bigger fish will escape the dragnet. That’s the way it has always happened since the Nixon administration. I don’t expect it will be any different this time – even though an attempted coup is much more serious and unprecedented. And yes, the two-tiered justice system will remain intact, regardless of what happens or despite what anyone in the bureaucracy, the administration or in political office says to convince us otherwise..”

    S/he has it exactly right. We have developed a ruling class of an administrative bureaucracy. The presidents are chosen out of this class. But the natives are getting restless. It’s the Republican hoi polloi who deem to catch on and want something better. In 1964, they rebelled and nominated Barry Goldwater whom the establishment took out (by joining with the Democrats). But we didn’t learn our lesson and 13 years later, we nominated Ronald Reagan (1980). He won but was shot two months later and had he died an Establishment president would have taken his place (Bush I). They were smarter then, or less powerful, and Reagan served eight years, but as soon as he was gone, we went back right on course with Bush I (New World Order). They nearly pulled it off (permanent power) but then came Donald Trump in 2016.

    This time they got pi$$ed at us and took us (by way of Trump) to the woodshed. But we and he proved stronger than they know. They’re still trying to take him/us down, but now WE are pi$$ed, too.

    Who knows what the outcome will be. The story is still being written.

    Liked by 3 people

  30. RobInPA says:

    So many articles to choose from, so I’ll just plop my sentiments down right here –

    FBHO ! !

    Liked by 1 person

  31. “…this all came together really within the last week, based on new evidence?”

    Barr: “Right.”

    I knew he was going to use Jensen as cover for this action. But his “right” is a direct denial by him that Sidney Powell’s uncovered evidence was definitive, and that Flynn should have been freed last October at the latest (actually, Barr now uses the same words I and others used when it all started: Flynn was incoming National Security Advisor, and had both the right and responsibility to talk with other nations; but we were ignored, even by those on our side who didn’t want to question Barr’s intentions, any more than they did every other traitor who started a “higher loyalty” investigatio/persecution of the President). You waited 7 months, Barr, and you are a liar that it was necessary to have Jensen go over it all again. You are a politician, not a lawman, and a corrupt one at that, with mass treason being ignored.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Mr e-man says:

      Barr did say Powell’s motions made him move faster on this. Is that what it takes? To make motions to compel these people to do something that upholds justice.

      Justice delayed is justice denied.That is especially true as the coup was able to accomplish the goal of stealing the midterm elections.And that created all this chaos, including shampeachment.

      Trumps term was hijacked by bad actors. It happened. That’s not justice.

      Liked by 1 person

  32. jumpinjarhead says:

    While I am sharing the good feelings being expressed today in this thread and others about yesterday’s positive events, I will continue to “keep my powder dry” as to where these and other positive developments may lead. I remain skeptical that all the coup participants, especially in the White House and the principals of the agencies will ever see the inside of a prison cell where they all belong for life without parole.

    Of course, we need to remain circumspect about General Flynn’s case as it will be the judge, a dimocrat, who makes the actual decision whether to dismiss the case or refuse and then effectively punt the case to the court of appeals for the DC Circuit and thereby relegate the General to a continuance of the living hell to which he has been unjustly and apparently illegally subjected.

    I also hope the General will seek damages from the federal government and the guilty individuals at DOJ and the FBI to at least be adequately compensated for his economic harm and to punish the criminals.

    Liked by 1 person

    • By pretending it was a necessity to wait until Jensen came up with “new evidence”, Barr was/is letting Judge Sullivan off the hook, for not having already freed Flynn, when we all knew long ago that the facts were all on Flynn’s side, yet the judge kept kicking the can down the road and playing along with the corrupt DOJ prosecution (and this, after he had already blown any credibility to judge the case, by blowing up at Flynn in open court and calling him a traitor). Simply, Barr is lying and has been all along: Sidney Powell’s evidence was definitive, and Flynn should have been freed at least 7 months ago.

      People need to heed Sundance’s words of warning about Barr’s intentions going forward. Barr hasn’t done anything — including letting go of Flynn — he hasn’t needed to do, to quell the peanut gallery (we who want the truth and nothing but the truth to come out, ASAP).

      Liked by 7 people

      • jumpinjarhead says:

        I tend to agree. I still do not think enough conservatives, and some Treepers, yet understand the breadth and depth of the DC swamp, and the subset cabal that are still engaged in the rolling coup attempt against Trump.

        Barr, while not aligned in a partisan, get-Trump way of the coup participants is nevertheless also a member of the DC swamp and will be deferential to other swamp dwellers to the extent he can.

        This doesn’t rule out aggressive criminal proceedings against all of the coup participants but makes them problematic, especially for those at the top (including Obama) of the cabal.

        The other very substantial impediment to prosecutions is the swamp dwellers in the federal bench in DC and the demographics and bias inherent in the DC jury pool.


    • spoogels says:

      AND his so called lawyers at Covington who colluded with the DOJ and FBI- and HOLDER
      Sue the pants off them

      Liked by 1 person

      • jumpinjarhead says:

        Excellent point—-and in addition to damages from the firm and individual lawyers, those actually representing him should be disbarred and the firm sanctioned by the DC bar.

        Liked by 1 person

  33. Beau Geste says:

    George Papadopoulos:
    “I played these clowns and got them right where I wanted when they tried to set me up with the $10,000 in Israel. I gave it right to my lawyer. That money has tracks and they lead directly to the special counsel.”

    So, now that the FBI “fabricating crime” has been admitted, where are the records of extortion CASH ‘tracks” ?
    Where did the money come from? Who got it from what ‘bank”? What account did it come from? Who signed for it? How did it get out of the US? Were Israel’s laws broken by bringing it into Israel? Was Mossad in on the scheme to “fabricate crime”?
    Where are teh records of planning, training, and then directing many FBI personnel to wait for Papadoc on the incoming side of customs? Telling them precisely what to look for? Telling them wht to do, in haste, after no CASH was found?
    All these records still exist. All mewler’s FBI agents remained under 7th Floor FBI control. WRAY HS ALL THESE RECORDS, BUT IS HIDING THEM LIKE HE DID WITH THE FLYNN “CRIME FABRICATION”.
    They were never given to Papadoc’s attorneys.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Beau Geste says:

      This fake CASH pile was intended to add to extortion pressure on Papadoc into a phony 18USC1001 ‘confession’. Papadoc did ‘confess’ to misremembering a date (which the DOJ/FBI also apparently got mixed up) rather than be bankrupted.

      Disgusting, and AG Barr and his henchman Wray know this was a “fabricated crime”. Where are the bank and other records?
      AG Barr is not ‘restoring’ the ‘integrity’ of the DOJ/FBI by continuing to hide the evidence of crooked fabrication of made-up crime to persecute political targets. Instead. Barr and Wray are reinforcing and confirming that the DOJ/FBI fabricate and cover up crime.

      Liked by 1 person

  34. dallasdan says:

    It appears to me that Barr dropped the case against Flynn to cut the losses to the FBI and DOJ. The revelations would surely have resulted in Flynn getting a new trial, during which Powell would expose bins full of dirty, criminal linen.

    Barr is still doing the Riverdance to give cover where he can (presently, Yates and continued praise for Wray). He is a fraud of the worst and most dangerous kind.

    Leftists are attacking Barr, but that is just an attempt to blunt the initial shock of the revelations and to advance the spin that the President is guilty of politicizing the Flynn case.

    I anticipate that Grenell is the President’s designated gunslinger in the name of justice. Additional, incriminating declassifications and releases of same will come from Grenell, not Barr. However, Barr will retain the power to obfuscate, delay, and shield coup-conspirators from prosecution.


    Liked by 3 people

    • Beau Geste says:

      Dan, IMHO, PDJT hoped Barr would be your ‘gundlinger’ to release the corruption evidence, when he gave Barr authority to bypass DNI Coates, who was protecting the swamp by holding up evidence of wrongdoing.
      That didn’t happen. Barr kept the corruption evidence hidden, even from congress and from criminal defendants like General Flynn, as had Coates.
      So, PDJT tried to replace Coates with Radcliffe – which was blocked by the crooked GOPe senators.
      PDJT’s workaround of removing Coates and appointing Grennell has worked very well. Grennell has removed some obama weasels, sent records to congress, and threatened to release records of malfeasance if congress and the DOJ/FBI did not.
      Barr and Wray have been content to hide these DOJ/FBI-incriminating records while persecuting Generl Flynn all along.
      IMHO, the only reason Barr dropped persecution of Flynn was that if he didn’t, Grennel would release to the public and Sidney Powell would get an opportunity to depose and expose the whole lying crew. And it would extend to the FISC judges, and the previously illegal ‘702 unmasking’ the FISC accepted.

      JMO, which is like yours.

      Liked by 4 people

  35. itsy_bitsy says:

    FOX was crazy for letting Herridge get away from them. Unbelievable stupid on their part! Great interview on her part, and very interesting answers on Barr’s part!

    Liked by 1 person

  36. berniekopell says:

    Not only was the interview hand picked for parts they wanted to use, but the segment starts with Norah O’Donnell spinning it to say Barr basically gave the order, and despite Flynn’s “lying” to the FBI and VPOTUS, there was under pressure from conservative critics. Typical. WATCH.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Tl Howard says:

    I’d rather POTUS not get into a pissing contest with Sessions.
    Of what use is it unless POTUS has info which he knows will come out that Sessions was a mole.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Brutalus says:

      In a CNN story today, Sessions said that he recused himself because he was a target of the cross fire hurricane investigation…im a little punch drunk right now with all of this…is this something new? (I know it might have been suspected)


      • Matthew LeBlanc says:

        Yes others have speculated Sessions is one of the redacted names in Rosenstein’s scope memo to Mueller. If this lines up then Sessions is confirming he knows he was a target and has been given proof.


  38. hawkins6 says:

    I wonder if Catherine Herridge is glad she jumped to CBS where much of her work will be edited and never shown on air.

    Gen. Flynn’s guilty plea was discussed a few times but neither mentioned that the guilty plea was do to prosecutorial threats against his son. I know this logical view has been widely disseminated by Sidney Powell, some at FNC and here at CTH etc. but I can’t recall if there are only believable comments by Sidney and Flynn about the blackmail or also documented evidence of these threats by Van Grack or anyone else. It was also not mentioned in Barr’s DOJ case dismissal documents. The evil MSM is using the guilty plea as a major angle to preserve the lies about Flynn.

    If there is evidence of this pressure it has to be widely shown and argued in an effort to counter the MSM’s platform of lies and defamation.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Tl Howard says:

      Yes, I was just thinking the same thing.

      The BEST rapid response team of my life is the one Bill Clinton had. Those guys, led by Paul Begala and the Ragin’ Cajun, James Carville, were superb.

      Of course, they got a lot of practice, but with each need for their services, they got better and better.

      I always expected Donald Trump to get together an excellent communications’ team but I’ve finally decided he likes to do his communicating. Unfortunately, by the time he sometimes gets around to it, the other side has established a meme that just won’t dissipate.

      Liked by 1 person

  39. Bubby says:

    If you don’t look you can’t discover if you can’t discover you can’t see evidence old or new!

    Liked by 5 people

    • hawkins6 says:

      “Not the mountains of prior evidence.”

      A Rocky Mountain or Cascade Mountain chain of valid indisputable evidence is not sufficient for A/G Barr to dismiss a case. Only a Himalayan level of evidence seems sufficient for him to free an innocent man and patriot. Very “sketchy” indeed.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Matthew LeBlanc says:

      When I heard him say that I thought to myself “oh he has to lie and say this all came from Jensen so he isn’t accused of interference”. These guys are all trained lawyers and spooks who know how to make a singular statement that can be interpreted 10 different ways.


  40. Douglas Paul Brandt says:

    We are definitely over the target.
    Boom’s away!
    I need a second seat belt!


  41. Kimmy k says:

    Did anybody see this with a bunch of transcripts? Stone, Hicks, Caputo…
    Have fun!!

    Liked by 1 person

  42. goldvalkyrie says:

    Excellent thanks for the transcription whoever did it, not a trivial effort.


  43. Bogeyfree says:

    IMO the simple litmus test to see if Barr and Durham are serious about learning and exposing the truth, now that Flynn is free to talk, let’s see how fast Barr and Durham depose him on everything he knows about the prior administration’s corruption.

    Remember he worked for Obama from 2012-2014 during the prime NSA Contractor Abuse and Database Building period.

    Since Sidney reads here maybe she can comment if Flynn has spoken with Durham yet.

    But if 2-3 weeks go by and Durham never deposed Flynn then IMO we have a major problem.


  44. CNN_sucks says:

    bagpipe Barr lost in the poker game. Grenell forces BB2 hands.


  45. J says:

    I would bet the farm there are sealed indictments right now.


  46. spoogels says:


    Take note of no 5

    The Department of Justice filed a motion Thursday to drop charges against former National Security Advisor (NSA) Michael Flynn. Democrats and the media claim the decision was the result of “politicization” at the DOJ.

    But there was no way for the DOJ to proceed after several bombshell revelations in the past several days. Here are seven things you need to know about the new developments — and what happens next in the saga:

    Last week:

    1. New documents suggest the FBI laid a trap for Flynn. In February, Attorney General William Barr appointed U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Jensen to review the prosecution against Flynn after reports of irregularities. Last week, Jensen delivered a trove of documents to Flynn’s defense team — including handwritten notes showing FBI agents discussed whether they would “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” In addition, emails showed the FBI had not properly warned Flynn that lying to the FBI was a crime when they met with him in the White House — a meeting then-Director James Comey planned to catch Flynn off guard.

    2. Text messages showed the FBI leadership kept the case open: Jensen’s trove included a memorandum showing that the FBI wanted to close the case against Flynn on Jan. 4, 2017, but that agent Peter Strzok — who hated Trump and had led the troubled investigations into both Hillary Clinton and the Trump campaign — ordered that the case be kept open. When asked why, Strzok referred to the “7th floor,” i.e. the FBI leadership.

    3. Flynn’s former law firm handed over documents suggesting secret pressure from the DOJ. Covington and Burling LLP, the legal team that handled his guilty plea in 2017, “discovered” that they had not handed all their documents to his new lawyer, Sidney Powell. Powell then told the court that the new documents showed the DOJ had threatened to indict his son unless Flynn pleaded guilty — a “side deal” that the DOJ kept hidden.

    This week:

    4. President Barack Obama set the Flynn investigation in motion: The House Intelligence Committee released 53 transcripts of interviews it conducted in the early days of the “Russia collusion” investigation. Former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told the committee it was Obama himself who told her about Flynn’s phone calls with the Russian ambassador. That information led the DOJ to investigate him under the obscure Logan Act of 1799, which bars private citizens from diplomacy and is almost never enforced.


    5. Flynn could go free for now, but could be prosecuted for perjury if Joe Biden wins the election. Sol Wisenberg, who helped investigate President Bill Clinton, pointed out on Fox News that Flynn could still be prosecuted for perjury, since he told the court he was guilty before deciding to withdraw his plea. Wisenberg said that a Biden administration could pursue those charges — unless President Trump pardoned Flynn.

    6. What did Obama know? What did Biden know? The crucial event behind the investigation of Flynn and the public smearing of President-elect Trump through the “Steele dossier” now appears to be the Oval Office meeting where Obama told Yates about Flynn’s phone calls, and Comey was assigned to inform Trump about the dossier. Biden was among those present, and the Trump campaign has started to demand answers. Obama’s role now appears much more direct, and may not have been “by the book,” as former NSA Susan Rice claimed.

    7. Possible indictment of former Obama officials. U.S. Attorney John Durham is still pursuing a criminal investigation into the origins of the Obama administration’s inquiry into the Trump campaign. Many believe indictments are imminent. Powell told Breitbart News Sunday last weekend that Comey and other officials may have committed obstruction of justice and similar crimes, though she did not echo Trump’s claims of treason.


  47. spoogels says:

    Obama Defense Official Evelyn Farkas Admitted She Lied On MSNBC About Having Evidence Of Collusion
    ‘I didn’t know anything.’

    May 8, 2020 By Sean Davis


    • X XYZ says:

      She Lied On MSNBC!
      How horrible!

      Are we supposed to get excited over anyone lying on TV?

      I might be excited it someone actually told the truth on TV!
      (rolleyes) 😉


  48. X XYZ says:

    Everyone in government who is a leftist – and also those on the right who are Never Trumpers. They all potentially benefit in some way – tangible or not.

    There isn’t just one person behind the curtain pulling the stings and issuing marching orders. It works like terrorist cells. They all have the same goal and operate independently of each other.


  49. spoogels says:

    How is this a victory, for Flynn? Justice? You call this Justice? #Flynn Full Audio:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s