Former Deputy AG Sally Yates Had The Original Joe Pientka 302 That is Now Mysteriously Missing…

FBI Agents Peter Strzok and Joe Pientka interviewed National Security Advisor Michael Flynn on January 24, 2017. According to documents presented in the court case, agent Peter Strzok did the questioning and agent Joe Pientka took most of the notes.

Following the interview agent Pientka then took his hand-written notes and generated an official FD-302; an FBI report of the interview itself.  There has been a great deal of debate over the first draft, the original FD-302 as it was written by Joe Pientka.  In the case against Flynn the DOJ prosecutors never presented the original Pientka 302.

Recent evidence from Brady material turned over to the defense by auditing attorney Jeff Jensen showed FBI lawyer Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok rewriting, editing and shaping the 302 on February 10, 2017, more than two weeks later:

Lisa Page is “pissed off” because Peter Strzok previously edited the 302 and she says he “didn’t even attempt to make this cogent and readable.”

Peter Strzok replies back to Lisa Page that he was “trying to completely re-write the thing so as to save Joe’s voice”, because Joe Pientka was the actual author.

Peter Strzok is re-writing the interview notes of Pientka in order to construct the framework to accuse Flynn of lying. Lisa Page is editing the re-write to make it more cogent and readable.

The question has remained: Where is the original 302 report as written by Pientka?

While the question(s) around the missing original 302 have yet to be reconciled, one possible path to discover its location and a copy of its original content lies in the testimony of Sally Yates.  Former DAG Sally Yates testified to congress that after the Flynn interview DOJ-National Security Division:

“received a detailed readout from the FBI agents who had interviewed Flynn.”  Yates said she felt “it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible.”

Yates is describing the Pientka 302.  The Pientka 302 could have been received at the DOJ-NSD later in the evening of January 24th, or perhaps the morning of the 25th.  Either is possible because Yates was having meetings about the topic.

In the DOJ motion to dismiss the case against Flynn, the records indicate Yates received a summary of the interview the night of the 24th, and the full detailed record came on the morning of January 25th:

The calendar of DOJ-NSD Associate Deputy AG Tashina Gauhar shows meetings with Sally Yates which align with the discussions of the Flynn interview and Yates receiving a summary on the 24th and the detail on the 25th:

Schedule of Associate Deputy Attorney General Tashina Gauhar

Together with DOJ-NSD head Mary McCord, Sally Yates used the 302 from Joe Pientka to travel to the White House on January 26th and brief White House counsel Don McGahn about the Flynn interview contrast against the content of the previously captured call between Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and Lt. Gen Mike Flynn.

If the FBI search for the original Pientka 302 is mysteriously impossible, perhaps the DOJ should go and get the version that was received by the DOJ-NSD on the evening of January 24th, or morning of January 25th, 2017.

Sally Yates had the original Pientka FD-302 report.

Yates testimony below:

Wednesday January 25th, 2017, – The Department of Justice, National Security Division, (at this timeframe Mary McCord was head of the DOJ-NSD) – received a detailed readout from the FBI agents who had interviewed Flynn. Yates said she felt “it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible.”

Thursday January 26th – (morning) Sally Yates called White House Counsel Don McGahn first thing that morning to tell him she had “a very sensitive matter” that had to be discussed face to face. McGahn agreed to meet with Yates later that afternoon.

Thursday January 26th – (afternoon) Sally Yates traveled to the White House along with a senior member of the DOJ’s National Security Division, “who was overseeing the matter”, that is Mary McCord. This was Yates’ first meeting with McGahn in his office, which also acts as a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF).

Yates said she began their meeting by laying out the media accounts and media statements made by Vice President Mike Pence and other high-ranking White House officials about General Flynn’s activity “that we knew not to be the truth.

According to Sally Yates testimony, she and Mary McCord presented all the information to McGahn so the White House could take action that they deemed appropriate. When asked by McGahn if Flynn should be fired, Yates answered, “that really wasn’t our call.”

Yates also said her decision to notify the White House counsel had been discussed “at great length.” According to her testimony: “Certainly leading up to our notification on the 26th, it was a topic of a whole lot of discussion in DOJ and with other members of the intel community.”

Friday January 27th – (morning) White House Counsel Don McGahn called Yates in the morning and asked if she could come back to his office.

Friday January 27th – (late afternoon) According to her testimony, Sally Yates returned to the White House late that afternoon. One of McGahn’s topics discussed was whether Flynn could be prosecuted for his conduct.

Specifically, according to Yates, one of the questions *McGahn asked Yates: “Why does it matter to DOJ if one White House official lies to another?” She explained that it “was a whole lot more than that,” and reviewed the same issues outlined the prior day.

McGahn then expressed his concern that taking any action might interfere with the FBI investigation of Flynn, and Yates said it wouldn’t: “It wouldn’t really be fair of us to tell you this and then expect you to sit on your hands,” Yates claims to have told McGahn.

McGahn asked if he could look at the underlying evidence of Flynn’s conduct, and she said they would work with the FBI over the weekend and “get back with him on Monday morning.”

Friday January 27th, 2017 – (evening) In what appears to be only a few hours later, President Trump is having dinner with FBI Director James Comey where President Trump asked if he was under investigation. Trump was, but to continue the auspices of the ongoing investigation, Comey lied and told him he wasn’t.

It is important not to get lost in the weeds of each part of the evidence as it starts to surface.  All of the material hits upon three key points:

  • Michael Flynn (and others) were wrongly targeted by the FBI.
  • Michael Flynn was not guilty of the accusations by the FBI; and Flynn was not guilty of the accusations that came later from the Mueller investigation as a result of evidence gathered by the FBI.
  • The former DOJ is claiming they were not involved in the targeting of Michael Flynn; nor were the former Obama DOJ officials aware of the FBI activity.

Some of the defensive claims by participants in the anti-Trump effort may hold up under scrutiny (former DOJ).  Some of the defensive claims will not.  The key point here is that we have entered a phase where the coup-plotters and participants are trying to justify what took place; and they are pointing fingers at each-other to avoid culpability.

Keep in mind this doesn’t even begin to touch on what the corrupt Mueller crew did with the corrupt FBI material.

This phase is the former Obama DOJ officials putting blame upon former Obama FBI officials for the origin of “Spygate” and the subsequent plot to target and remove the incoming administration… However, despite their efforts there is no sunlight between them.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, FBI, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Spygate, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

332 Responses to Former Deputy AG Sally Yates Had The Original Joe Pientka 302 That is Now Mysteriously Missing…

  1. anthohmy says:

    When did McCord or Yates get a copy off the transcripts and from whom?

    Liked by 3 people

    • WhiteBoard says:

      Good point man..

      Was she so stupid to talk of something she was only briefed on?

      Furthering the conspiracy, and only finding out later IT WAS EDITED?

      i need to review! if Peter edicted after Jan 2020 then she is good.. but iiiiiiiii think she may be in trouble = ]

      Liked by 2 people

    • Loggerman says:

      Did McGahn ever get the underlying evidence against Flynn?

      Liked by 1 person

      • anthohmy says:

        Not that we’ve been made aware of

        Liked by 1 person

        • WhiteBoard says:

          you have been bringing this up..

          2 docs..

          the 302 ! and the Call Transcript

          WHERE THE HELL are they!

          Who unmasked!!!!! – insert Grenell and Superhero music.

          a big question is WHY did Lynch NOT TALK when COMEY went into her office?

          -I’d say because she knows of COMEY TAPES.

          Liked by 2 people

      • jnr2d2 says:

        Good question. And if I remember correctly, Yates and McCord were talking “Logan Act” between themselves before the meeting with McGann.. Did they raise that with McGann?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Issy says:

          jnr2d2, I got the impression that was brought up with McGann also. Maybe from the hearing. I haven’t had time to listen to it again.

          Like

  2. anthohmy says:

    When did McCord or Yates get a copy off the transcripts and from whom?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Proverbs 28:4-5
    Those who forsake the law praise the wicked,
    But those who keep the law strive with them.
    Evil men do not understand justice,
    But those who seek the Lord understand all things.

    Liked by 5 people

  4. deqwik2 says:

    At the 48:00 mark Yates is talking about Not having the 302 nor had she ever seen it.
    At the 50:20 mark she is asked why she went to WH without waiting on the 302.

    Liked by 9 people

    • I can barely stand to watch this. These people are truly the spawn of Satan.

      Liked by 12 people

      • vikingmom says:

        I agree Seneca – the level of arrogance makes it almost impossible to stomach but I try to rest in the promises that God sees all and knows all and that justice will come at His appointed time, although there are certainly days when I would like it to come RIGHT NOW!!

        Liked by 7 people

      • Issy says:

        Seneca, I watched it live. It was hard then, not sure I will watch that arrogant witch again.

        Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      So Yates & Co. went to McGahn with only a summary of the F302, not the actual 302 itself. That summary was obviously prepared to look like Flynn lied, when the fact is that the original 302 exonerated Flynn, per the FBI’s initial conclusion. It was Strzok et al who decided to edit (alter) the 302 to make it read like Flynn answered differently than he ac tually did, and thus lied.

      This means that Yates was obviously either unaware of the original questions and Flynn’s actual responses (exonerating information) on the original 302, or she was in on the scam. To me, she was awfully smooth and forthright in this hearing and appeared like she really believed that what she “knew” (and was telling the Senators) was the truth and that she acted appropriately. Of course we now know differently.

      Liked by 3 people

      • WhiteBoard says:

        Yes!!!
        greaT work deqwik2~!!!

        She could only do he part IF SHE BELEIVED the lie of the edited 302.

        She is the first WHISTLEBLOWER – HELP i have something to say.

        this status will keep hillary from killing them

        Liked by 2 people

      • sarsfield says:

        the hour by hour timeline here becomes really important – we have Yates briefing McGann using an alleged oral (from FBI) summary of the Pientka unedited 302 on 1-26 – but then we have yates saying McCord actually met w/Pientka ostensibly b/4 1-26 and she compared Pientka’s raw written 302 to Pierntka’s actual handwritten meeting notes to verify accuracy. So McCord had seen the Pientka raw 302 by the 1-26 mtng w/McGahn? did Yates? if yes, what did they both tell McGahn on 1-26 as they both went to the WH? Why not show a copy of the 302 to him in the mtng? McGahn could decide for himself if Flynn lied. Then in subsequent mtngs w/Yates and McGahn, McCord isn’t there? If McGahn didn’t see the 302 on 1-26 why didn’t he ask for it? Per Yates story, McGahn almost seems anxious to buy the DOJ narrative. I must be missing something.

        Liked by 3 people

        • deqwik2 says:

          The second meeting on the 27th Yates took McCord back with her & McGahn did tell them that he would like to see the evidence that they had been telling him about. Yates told McGahn that she would have to make arrangements for him to see it but she was fired so she doesn’t know if McGahn ever got to see the info.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Issy says:

        I think she is a liar and I don’t believe one word she says in exonerating herself.

        Liked by 1 person

    • RY says:

      At 55:00 mark and 104:00 mark, Yates said the underlying material was ready for review for McGahn by DOJ/FBI on Monday, 1/30/2017, transcript and 302 ready then?

      Like

  5. Guessed says:

    With Jimmy Hoffa’s body and those three puzzle pieces that I have been looking for…

    Liked by 2 people

  6. billybob says:

    Anybody arrested today ?

    Liked by 4 people

  7. Lawton says:

    Yep looking at the different questioning of Yates they held off on writing an official 302 for a few days. I bet it was written by Pientka within the 5 day rule however but was then deleted and changed to have as a weapon against Flynn. Pientka had to be fully aware of all this also. Definitely one of the crooks.

    Liked by 4 people

  8. Bogeyfree says:

    Based on PT’s comment today that Obamagate was going on long before he came into office gives me hope that Durham and Barr just might be digging into all the spying maybe as far back as 2009 or worst case at least back to around 2012-2016 with all the Alleged FIB / NSA Contractor Spying on Americans in addition to the PT Coup

    This plus the fact….

    1) We have a dedicated US Attorney out of Pittsburgh looking into Ukraine

    2) We saw just yesterday the President of Mexico wants to reopen Fast and Furious

    3) And with the addition of Anthony Scarpelli, the Chief of the violent crimes and narcotics trafficking section for the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, D.C.,who also has been a specialist in RICO-type investigations

    Gives me some hope that maybe, just maybe this is spooling up to not only be a Conspiracy case but possibly also a RICO case.

    Put those together and the price of poke just went up IMO.

    Liked by 7 people

    • WRB says:

      Lou Dobb’s reported that Jensen (who is investigating the Flynn investigation) is now working for Durham. He made it sound like a new hire.

      Liked by 4 people

      • GB Bari says:

        But we know from a previous report Jensen, being done with the Flynn scam, was simply assigned by the AG to help Durham because of the voluminous amount of work facing Durham.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Doug Amos says:

          Durham is going to get a little assistance; President Zero is going in front of a military tribunal. Grenell is the real deal.

          Liked by 1 person

          • GB Bari says:

            I have a hard time believing it would get that far (as it well should if there is truly one system of justice as AG Barr stated on CBS) but I will be ecstatic if it does go there.

            Like

    • twinkiethekid2 says:

      2 reasons PT won’t let this go unanswered even if all the rest want it to. 1. Once he’s out of office, they will come after him, his family, and supporters with a wrath and he knows it. You’ve got to kill the hydra now or all the stunts the left will be pulling (i.e. cheat by mail and others) may have you out after just 1 term and they are protected and on a rampage the following January. 2. He’s the kind of guy that will be sure once you flick his ear, to make sure you walk away with at least a black eye. It just seems like his m.o.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Joemama says:

        His life and his family’s life probably depends on cleaning the swamp. They will destroy him once he is out of office, if he doesn’t destroy them now.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. X XYZ says:

    The really damning thing is that Pientka’s notes show that Flynn was telling the truth. (There is nothing wrong with handwritten notes. There is plenty wrong with rewriting any record that is exculpatory.) Peter Smirk immediately leaped at the opportunity to be the henchman by rewriting the report. He enlisted lawyer/lover lovely Lisa Page to help him make the fiction sound believable, and she did. Then once it said what they wanted it to say, they submitted it to the higher-ups who presented it as gospel truth – the same as they used the spurious Steele dossier – to get a conviction.

    Framing an innocent person is beyond reprehensible. Apparently malicious prosecution is only a civil offense, not a criminal one. This needs to change – but don’t expect those in power and our so-called system of justice, from the beat cop to the chief justice of the court to ever be held to the same standard as any ordinary citizen they can persecute at will.

    If there is especially one particular person in this coup who deserves capital punishment, it is Peter Smirk. That will never happen. He’s relatively low on the totem pole of top-down administrative corruption. As in the mob, he volunteered to be the hit man. He wanted to be a “made man”. Three hots and a cot in jail is too good for him. But what I would like to see happen is to see cocky Peter put in the old-fashioned stocks, and give ordinary citizens the opportunity to give him ‘five across the face’ until his snotty sneer is wiped off of it – daily. A head shot from a linebacker could literally spin Peter’s head around. But that would be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

    Liked by 3 people

    • WSB says:

      This isn’t just malicious prosecution, this is an attempted overthrow of a government.

      And we have plenty of people acting as fellow witnesses and in unison here.

      Liked by 7 people

      • Issy says:

        WSB, to me it will always be Sedition. I said that the day I read the first Strzok & Page text. I’ve been told it doesn’t fit the legal definition, but if spying, lying and leaking to remove a dutifully elected president isn’t a seditious conspiracy, I don’t know what it takes.

        Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      I agree with WSB.

      This goes way beyond malicious prosecution. Strzok was working with full knowledge of his management as well as several peers, and he was handling a few critical pieces of the coup, not all of it.

      This was an attempted coup d’état by fraudulent, coercive non-violent means. It is unique in our nations history (I think) and the perpetrators needs to be treated extremely harshly so as to dissuade others from repeating the crimes.

      Liked by 4 people

      • X XYZ says:

        GB, you know I agree.

        Maybe some don’t understand what the mob is. The FBI, the CIA, the foggy bottom of the government swamp is the mob x 1000’s.

        Peter Smirk aspired to be a capo, or at least to rise a bit above his rank of a swamp lieutenant.
        Need I say more?

        But unless Peter Smirk’s unforgettable face gets some plastic surgery, if he’s not in jail, no witness protection program can guarantee what might happen to him.

        And even if he goes to jail… Ya never know.
        Just ask Epstein. Too late. Dead men don’t talk.

        Liked by 2 people

    • WRB says:

      The thing is, Flynn could have “lied” or misdirected all he wanted to those two agents, and it would not be a crime. Flynn would be in the wrong to divulge classified information to someone who did not have a “need to know”, so I can imagine he would be circumspect in how he answered questions.

      Lying to an FBI agent is only a crime if they are legitimately investigating the “perp”, and the lie impedes their investigation. But the FBI did not have a legitimate investigation. The “He’s a Russian asset” case was closed (or should have been closed), and asking Flynn questions about phone calls (which they have transcripts of) sure wasn’t going to bring any evidence that shazaam! he is a Russian spy.

      So they were investigating something else? What? They never said, though others have mumbled “Logan act”. But they did not officially open the case. For all practically purposes, they were just two agents shooting the breeze with Flynn.

      Anyway, the reason the DOJ is dropping the case is that the FBI did not have legitimate case open on Flynn, so the “lies” (if any) do not count as a crime.

      On the other hand, investigating an official of the US gov’t without predicate, in support of a conspiracy to overthrow a duly elected gov’t sure sounds like a crime. Lots of ’em.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Issy says:

      XXYZ, they used to throw rotten fruit at people in stocks. That would wipe the sneer off Strzok’s face.

      Like

      • X XYZ says:

        Issy,
        Flung excrement works even better.

        But these days, being given any “punishment” in a federal pen, experiencing having three hots (Including accommodation of kosher or halal meals?) and a cot in a retreat facility is considered “cruel and unusual” punishment.

        What the hell does “held accountable” REALLY mean?

        Punishment is – BAAD. Blanket forgiveness is – GOOOD!

        Heinous crimes. Murder? Rape? Framing an innocent person? EVERYONE is automatically forgiven now. Hitler? Stalin? Mao? They were just having a bad day. Or year. Or decade. Or…whatever. “What difference…at this point…DOES IT MAKE?”

        Just say three Our Fathers and three Hail Marys and promise you will never, ever do that sin again.

        Yes, I promise. I said it. That makes it so. Lip service. Same as taking an “oath”. A “SOLEMN” oath. I swore on that… um, you know… the THING.

        Wasn’t my swearing that oath good enough? Doesn’t that mean I’ll escape Judgement Day?

        Liked by 1 person

  10. islandpalmtrees says:

    *Time To Be Careful*

    Durham to Joe Pientka, who received General Flynn’s original 302 document and do you have a copy? Then repeat the same questioning to the person referenced by Joe Pientka. Continue until done with the link-list

    Match this with the replies from Sally Yates. Sally Yates had the original Pientka FD-302 report.

    I would also recommend matching copies with the Associate Deputy AG Tashina Gauhar and White House counsel Don McGahn, too.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. I am so not in awe.

    the sally yates “didn’t even know” is dirty barrys Siegfried line.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. JC Calhoun says:

    Pientka has most probably flipped…no other reason that he has not been seen, heard about, or heard from in months…

    Liked by 2 people

    • Bogeyfree says:

      Has anyone called out to the SF FIB office and ask to speak to him?

      Maybe the SF move was a front for witness protection?

      Liked by 1 person

    • phaedrus cj says:

      Epsteined?

      Like

    • DrNo76 says:

      I have to believe Pientka has turned State’s evidence. Were he in the coup camp, I don’t believe he’d still be in the government’s employ, nor the efforts made to keep him out of the limelight. And very effectively so. Plus, the fact that Strzok and Page were so furiously editing his 302 suggests that he said, no, to that plan. Or, at least, said nothing while they others did the editing. I want, very badly, to believe that there was an FBI person worth their salt acting in the face of the perfidy of the outgoing administration. And he would be perfectly positioned to give Barr et. al., the heads of virtually everyone, Strzok. page. McCabe, possibly Comey, Yates, McCOrd and Brennan if Strzok and he talked about Brennan’s fusion center. My gut says the log jam will break soon. If it does, it will be before mid July.

      Like

  13. hokkoda says:

    I would not be surprised to learn that the “readouts” were not formal documentation, but a verbal summary based on the agent’s notes. If the plan laid out by Comey, Yates, and Obama was to entrap Flynn, then Yates’ job was to pressure the WH by acting like a concerned 3rd Party to scare McGahn and spur the WH to fire Flynn.

    Liked by 4 people

  14. ChampagneReady says:

    “It is important not to get lost in the weeds of each part of the evidence as it starts to surface.”

    The evidence of even the smallest phase of this frame up is like the Everglades.” There is enough here to keep 5 Special Prosecutors busy.

    Liked by 2 people

    • X XYZ says:

      Or an EPA army of sanitary engineers.

      But if and when we’ve ever emptied all the sewage from the overflowing cesspool of the DC swamp, where will we put it? Here’s the way I heard it sung in an old refrain, to the Colonel Bogey March.

      Bullshit – it makes the grass grow green,
      Bullshit – it makes the grass grow green,
      Bullshit – or is it horseshit?
      Or is it bullshit and horseshit combined?

      I tried to find any sung version with any lyrics of the Colonel Bogey March on YouTube. Nope. Only instrumental versions are available. Censorship through omission? Political correctness? Nah. There is no political censorship in America.

      Here is some historical background for those who are interested.

      http://dictionary.sensagent.com/Colonel%20Bogey%20March/en-en/

      Like

  15. Azrajo says:

    Why hasn’t Barr or justice raided the offices and home of Bob Bauer like they did to Stone, Manafort,Cohen?
    Bauer, Obama’s personal atty, and cabinet member founding partner of Perkins Coie . He is also married to zither Maoist Anita Hill who was also in Obamas cabinet. That firm received millions from the dnc, Hillary campaign and Obama for America the same time they hired Fusion GPS.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Bogeyfree says:

    Anyone amazed with all the stuff coming out and just how many FIB policy violations they would add up to be and yet not a peep of outrage from Wray?

    Liked by 6 people

  17. swamp toads like chris stirewalt are all being outed as david corn ass kissers by the dozens now that barry swooped in (to the sliding door).

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mr. Morris says:

      Chris Stirewalt an Obama fanboy, opined on Brett Baier’s Show that Obama probably made an error speaking out. I think Obama mouthing off was wonderful. What is Obama afraid of?

      Liked by 1 person

  18. xcontra says:

    I have been wondering what Grenell had in his bag last Friday https://wp.me/px10v-sh but it could not have been the mysterious 302 file. Right now the original 302 is one of the bigger MacGuffins.

    Liked by 1 person

    • X XYZ says:

      Shilly-Shally Sally then said “Oh, Silly me! Now I’ve found it! All this time and I never knew the 302 was in my handbag!”

      Uh, huh. Even a female prosecutor wouldn’t fall for that excuse.
      But a swamp judge certainly could.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. Troublemaker10 says:

    Maybe they did the same thing to the original 302 that Pelosi did to Trump’s State Of The Union Address.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Issy says:

      Troublemaker10, Maybe? Unless Pientka kept a copy and can be found to testify, I think we may be SOL on the original 302. I think Ms Page & her lover need to be asked what happened to it. They had the original to make all their edits.

      Like

  20. jx says:

    Missing? No, withheld.

    While paper notes may be long gone, electronic notes are permanent. The date & time and user-id is recorded during the creation, updating, or reading of a record.

    Like

  21. WSB says:

    Wow, Lou is calling out Ryan tonight!

    Liked by 3 people

  22. John says:

    The plot thicknens,never a dull moment

    Liked by 1 person

  23. MACAULAY says:

    Haven’t read all the above posts…but just wanted to say…what a travesty it is that, four years later, WE THE PEOPLE still don’t know what Joe Prienka has to say about all this…not even a hint…let alone the Truth under oath.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. John says:

    The real scandal is the media reports on the Pence interview, somehow they knew the questions to ask and phrase them in a way to setup Pence knowing what was in the Flynn transcripts beforehand. They were seeded the questions and created their own scandal. Just like Obama’s off the record phone call the other day that “found” it’s way into the media We know the playbook. It’s easy to see once you know where to look. There is no interview of Flynn without the media setup in advance of Pence.

    BTW – you can see from the Access Hollywood reaction (chuck todd declaring Trump is finished), the Flynn interview, the electoral delegates, the Jill Stein (I suddenly raised millions of dollars) recount, ventilators, Mueller, disinfectants, Charlottesville and on and on and on. It’s predictable and just needs to be called out.

    Liked by 2 people

  25. leon0112 says:

    Is it possible that Yates is talking to Durham and trying to place the blame on the FBI for all of this?

    Liked by 1 person

  26. PCS says:

    The 302 cannot be missing. It is electronically stored, password protected with an audit trail.

    Liked by 1 person

    • CJinKnoxTN says:

      That’s what Sidney Powell has been saying. If that is the case, then doesn’t Durham already have it?

      Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      Any electronic file can be deleted.

      And we REALLY don’t know if the handwritten F302 was literally / accurately transcribed into the electronic format or if content was altered during the initial transcription…

      One would think the original handwritten form is of such legal importance that it has to be preserved. But one would think a lot of this process would be adhered to and we know it wasn’t.

      Liked by 1 person

    • bonkti says:

      Unless it wasnt entered digitally.

      Like

  27. rayvandune says:

    What the hell constitutes a “readout” of the interview, if not the 302, what was the blazing hurry that they couldn’t wait for the full 302, and why did McGahn not MAKE them wait and produce it before taking any action?

    Liked by 1 person

  28. rayvandune says:

    What the hell constitutes a “readout” of the interview, if not the 302, what was the blazing hurry that they couldn’t wait for the full 302, and why did McGahn not MAKE them wait and produce it before taking any action?

    Like

    • tav144 says:

      A “summary”. IMO

      Like

    • Issy says:

      rayvandune, I think it is like so much of fbi speak, that is designed to give plausible deniability. In other words, I didn’t see it, but this is what I was told was in it.

      Remember Rosenstein didn’t read the fisa warrant he signed. He said he was briefed on it. Briefed is another weasel word. It’s not my fault, this is what I was told.

      Like

  29. etbnyc says:

    McCord is more slippery than an eel living in a jar of grease.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Charlotte Powell Brooks says:

    Joe took notes.
    Are these true handwritten notes (pen/pencil on pad) or like comey’s memos?
    Wouldn’t these notes be as important as the original 302? Whether it’s an original 302 or not, shouldn’t some type of documentation (notes) be attached to back up the information in it? The 302 is filled out afterwards, not during.
    Then there’s the question of recording devices.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. jumpinjarhead says:

    Yet another irony (dealing with progressivists always involves irony that some less charitable folks would call hypocrisy) is she is a graduate of UGA Law School and was invited back to give a speech about speaking truth to power after he disobeyed POTUS.

    https://www.redandblack.com/uganews/sally-yates-spoke-at-uga-s-school-of-law-on/article_11c7fb9a-2f68-11e8-bc2f-ef0ffbb23d65.html

    Liked by 1 person

  32. mericn says:

    My fear is… will the jurors be able to comprehend this huge scheme when we get to trial time?

    Like

  33. k4jjj says:

    Does Pientka still walk the Earth?

    The stakes are so high in the revelation of this government overthrow attempt, somebody could well end up “sleeping with the fishes” like Luca Brasi.

    Liked by 2 people

  34. Conservative_302 says:

    God’s got this. Slowly but surely it will all come out. Threatened with prison, people are going to talk. No way 100% of these people are willing to go to prison over this. What a gift to us conservatives. Obarfas legacy is Obamagate. Ha ha Ha! Combine Obamagate with Biden’s future live debate, and I’d say it’s popcorn time. Trump and Grennel will bring down the hammer forcing Barr and Durham to do the right thing.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Johnny says:

    Wait a minute here, Did Rosenstien get threatened with contempt if Gowdy and Ratcliffe were not allowed to view the 302 file and the EC documunts that started this mess?

    Or am I remembering different investigations or coup attempts? Too much sedition to keep straight anymore for my old mind.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Issy says:

      You are correct that he was threatened, but I’m not sure which specific documents they were allowed to see. I think it was the unredacted IG Report, but I could be wrong. As you said, it’s all too much.

      Like

  36. evergreen says:

    Isn’t it strikingly illegal for one FBI agent to author another’s sworn testimony?

    Strzok is saying he’s writing in Pientka’s voice a document that is ostensibly Pientka’s.

    Liked by 1 person

    • X XYZ says:

      Enter FBI lawyer Lovely Lisa the Lover saying, ‘here Peter, I’ll help you make it fly’.

      Now we need to hear chapter & verse of what law covers that transgression.
      Then we need to see what the penalties are for doing that.
      Then we need to see if anyone is willing to prosecute it.

      The first one to sing in a congressional hearing was Lovely Lisa. As I recall, after three days of questioning her quite a while ago, I think it was Nunes who said that ‘we got a lot of information from her’.

      Like

    • TMonroe says:

      “Isn’t it strikingly illegal for one FBI agent to author another’s sworn testimony?”

      Punishable by ethics training

      Liked by 1 person

  37. DeWalt says:

    Here is some good insights. Yates is discussed.

    Like

  38. zaq123 says:

    If one were to take a deep dive into her work as the US Attorney in Atlanta, they’d quickly see how she let quite a few folks off the hook. She’s as dirty as the day is long.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. ezgoer says:

    Better hope Trump wins re-election or all this goes away … and the bad guys win.

    Like

  40. goldvalkyrie says:

    Enter stage left, Obama into his own circular firing squad.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Benedict Comey says:

    Sally could avoid life at GITMO by turning on Owemugabe the tryant. Jast sayin’

    Like

  42. lackawaxen123 says:

    court of law … chain of evidence … no original 302 then later altered 302’s are the fruit of poisoned tree and inadmissible … basically the interview never happened … as far as evidence is concerned …

    Like

  43. railer says:

    The alphabet agency rats are all in the sack, tearing at each other. This is the good thing about Trump playing the long game, and waiting for outside forces (an eventual failed criminal prosecution of Flynn) to have their effect. Trump created no distractions, and will now sit back and watch these rats expose each other as they battle in the sack, with the odd tweet kicking the sack.

    Like

  44. Mr e-man says:

    So where are the whistleblowers? So many Departments, so many people involved in this, yet no one is coming forward to say what really happened? For almost 4 years? Not a single one?

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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