Nothing Inappropriate – DNI John Ratcliffe Releases Wiretapped Flynn-Kislyak Transcripts and FBI Summaries (“CR Cuts”) Of Those Transcripts…

DNI John Ratcliffe has released the transcripts and FBI generated summaries known as “CR cuts” from the telephone calls between incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. [pdf version here].

A fast review of the transcripts (also embed below) shows there was nothing inappropriate or improper about the conversations at all.  Quite the opposite: Lt. General Flynn was direct, diplomatic, polite and represented the interests of U.S. policy from both the outgoing Obama administration and incoming Trump administration.

The views expressed by Lt. General Flynn did not impede or obstruct outgoing Obama policy nor did they undermine any position during the transition.  Any media reporting to the contrary was completely false.

The FBI summaries or “CR Cuts”, created by FBI analysts, are what FBI Director James Comey gave to former DNI James Clapper on January 4th, for use in briefing former President Obama.  The summaries are FBI interpretations of what the calls contained.

It has been my long-standing suspicion the FBI summaries (CR Cuts) will not accurately reflect the content of the calls; and were purposefully manipulated by the FBI to give a false impression that Flynn was undermining Obama.  I am doing that comparison now.

Here’s the summaries and transcripts:

.

More to follow…

 

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Legislation, media bias, President Trump, propaganda, Russia, Spygate, THE BIG UGLY, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

605 Responses to Nothing Inappropriate – DNI John Ratcliffe Releases Wiretapped Flynn-Kislyak Transcripts and FBI Summaries (“CR Cuts”) Of Those Transcripts…

  1. Magabear says:

    It took over 3 years to get the truth out over this Flynn setup…….and he’s still awaiting his court case to be thrown out!

    2008-2016…….the most corrupt years in American history. And it continues even now with the Obozo presstitute media.

    Liked by 11 people

    • MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

      This country will never recover from those 8 years. Think of all the pathetic and corrupt people he placed into government. It’s not our fault his father was a drunk and dumped nor is out fault his mother was a road hore and found happiness with her ankles in the air. Then she dumped him as well. What could go wrong.
      O ne
      B ig
      A zz
      M istake
      A merica

      Liked by 8 people

    • johnnyfandango says:

      Let’s also not forget the framing of Mannford, Stone etc. There wasn’t an underlined crime to begin with. All bs process crimes by Weisman and his band of liars and thieves.

      Liked by 6 people

  2. Patience says:

    In the mean time…..
    FOX (ahem) ‘news’ has been focusing on Trump tweets…/ race and China.

    Only the opinion ‘shows’ (Tucker, Hannity & Ingraham) will have BREAKING NEWS.

    Liked by 7 people

    • muckeyduck says:

      That really gets me how Hannity will have a banner along with sound affect that reads, “Breaking News”, new that have been out for most of the day, if not two days. Then the very next hour, Ingram will break that same news. Hannity is a news reader, he can’t think any further than his headlines.

      Like

      • 🍺Gunny66 says:

        That’s why he never shuts up. Great guests but he never let’s them speak.

        He answers all the questions they should answer, cuts them off, etc

        It’s because he does not have a sense of logic….and listening to someone else and then replying in a sensical manner puts an abject fear /scares the crap out of him. So he does his research until he is confident in what “he” says, he just never shuts up……

        And most of all he milks his viewership by all these teasing “ tick tick” teasers.

        I don’t watch him at all…….

        Liked by 1 person

    • Jenevive says:

      Martha discussed it on her show for all of about 5 mins.

      Like

  3. rayvandune says:

    KISLYAK:And I justwantedtotelIyouthatwefound thattheseactionshavetargetednotonly against Russia, but also against the president elect.
    FLYNN: yeah, yeah
    KISLYAK: and and with all our rights to responds we have decided not to act now because, its because people are dissatisfied with the lost ofelections and, and its very deplorable.

    The Russians know that Obama is getting back at Trump, and why: “… but also against the president elect”… “because people are dissatisfied with the lost (sic) of elections and, and it’s very deplorable”

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Jenevive says:

    Wait so Russia KNEW that POTUS O was trying to set them up as well
    As POTUS Trump..and kislyak WARNED Flynn of this.. and Flynn didn;t seem
    too surprised by that news?

    Is this why the Dem went hair on fire when POTUS went to that conference and had
    a private chat with PUTIN and the Dems wanted the translators notes to see what POTUS
    and Putin talked about..were they worried Putin was spilling the beans to POTUS?

    Liked by 10 people

    • PinotNoir says:

      Bet Putin told Trump at least by Helsinki

      Like

    • WRB says:

      I think that when the FBI/Obama saw in the Dec 31, 2016 conversation:

      KISLYAK: And I just wanted to tell you that we found that these actions have targeted not only against Russia, but also against the president elect.

      they decided they had to “get Flynn.” Nothing to do about sanctions… Obama and his cabal at DOJ and FBI knew that Flynn, with this hint, would investigate what the hell was going on, and once he starting pulling on that thread, he would find all kinds of bad stuff. Flynn had to go.

      A few days later, on Jan 4, Strzok was messaging Lisa Page about how lucky he was the FBI had not yet officially closed the Flynn investigation. That means he had a “legal” way to setup a perjury trap, or if worse comes to worse, make up a perjury accusation.

      In this case, I think Yates and others decided to “embellish” what Flynn said during his “interview,” and take a story to McGahn about “Flynn lied.”

      I really want to see what evidence Yates gave McGahn, because I think they gave him nothing in writing, or (I hope!) some pure BS report. And McGahn was too naive to realize it was just a BS story, and bought it.

      Flynn was confronted with this story, and he probably said something like, “Well, I do not remember talking about sanctions, but if the FBI has a record of it, I must have… so yes, I misled the vice president.” And that was that.

      Liked by 2 people

    • WhiteBoard says:

      Yes .

      Russians went back and reviewed the action and concluded it was a dik move by the Iranian President

      Great catch. Please keep talking. Not everyone will read the transcript.

      Like

      • doyouseemyvision says:

        How did the Russians get their intel that Obama’s people were targeting Russia and the President elect? If it is specific coup plotters’ conversations that directly speak to these points that were captured, uh-oh.

        Like

    • WhiteBoard says:

      Yes .

      Russians went back and reviewed the action and concluded it was a dik move by the Iranian President

      Great catch. Please keep talking. Not everyone will read the transcript.

      Like

  5. berniekopell says:

    Summary of the Flynn mandamus case this week and last FYI.

    Five different applicants want to file an amicus brief: The Watergate Prosecutors, the “Lawyers Defending American Democracy, Inc.”, and “Former Federal District Court Jurists in Support of the District Court” (filed today). These three appear to want to support Sullivan’s position (note that I have not read the briefs as I do have a day job); a group of Attorneys General (States of Ohio, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia) have also filed, probably in support of DOJ given the states involved; and someone named by John M. Reeves (filed his motion today and appears to support the Flynn position).

    A person named Abe Olumide (a jail house lawyer as best I can tell) moved to intervene and the panel said “No”. Someone named Paul Andrew Mitchell moved to intervene today (probably another fame seeker).

    Several of the amicus filings had errors as there were amended filings. This means they probably got a notice from the Clerk’s office that the filing had a deficiency (local rules violation) so they had to file amended versions to fix the errors.

    The Clerk issued a couple docket entry corrections noting that the amicus briefs had been “lodged” but not “filed.” The amicus briefs are not considered filed unless the panel gives permission.

    I am still hopeful that the panel issues an omnibus order denying all amicus requests. The panel might be waiting until the June 1 deadline is over to deny them all rather than deny them one-by-one as they come in.

    Liked by 4 people

    • lawton says:

      Just take them and then slap Sullivan down with a few sentences pointing out established case law.

      Liked by 2 people

    • gda53 says:

      There was a filing today by a host of well known lawyer-folk (including Roosterhead) that absolutely eviscerated the Lawfare nonsense.

      It was, apparently, quite epic.

      No word on the DOJ filing yet AFAIK.

      Like

  6. albertus magnus says:

    Grenell and Ratliffe being heroic.

    Grassley and Johnson doing their jobs.

    Barr and Durham? Make it count, guys!

    Liked by 7 people

  7. lawton says:

    My guess is Durham or Jensen has seen what the original 302 was whether McCabe had it deleted or not and it probably has the words “box(ed) us in” just like Undercover Huber pointed out the Pientka notes and transcript have in them showing that one charge is BS.

    Like

  8. gsonFIT says:

    I need some help understating the General Flynn charging documents:

    https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:0107b112-8f36-4f1c-b54b-9d18c9c799e7

    BEGIN QUOTE
    “On or about January 24, 2017, FLYNN agreed to be interviewed by agents from
    the FBI (“January 24 voluntary interview”). During the interview, FLYNN falsely stated that he
    did not ask Russia’s Ambassador to the United States (“Russian Ambassador”) to refrain from
    escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against
    Russia. FLYNN also falsely stated that he did not remember a follow-up conversation in which
    the Russian Ambassador stated that Russia had chosen to moderate its response to those
    sanctions as a result of FLYNN’s request. In truth and in fact, however, FLYNN then and there
    knew that the following had occurred:”
    END QUOTE

    If I can paraphrase… this reads that General Flynn lied that he did not ask Russia to refrain from escalating the situation because of the Sanctions the U.S. imposed on Russia.

    Do triple negatives make a positive? What the Heck!

    Here is what I thought was relevant from the 2nd call:

    START
    FLYNN: So, you know, depending on, depending on what uh, actions they take over this current
    issue of the cyber stutf, you know, where they’re looking like they’re gonna, they’re gonna
    dismiss some number of Russians out of the country, I understand all that and I understand that~
    that, you know, the information that they have and all that, but what I would ask Russia to do is
    to not – is – is – if anything – because I know you have to have some sort of action – to, to only
    make it reciprocal. Make it reciprocal. Don’t – don’t make it- don’t go any further than you
    have to. Because I don’t want us to get into something that has to escalate, on a, you know, on a
    tit for tat. You follow me, Ambassador?
    END

    1) depending on, depending on what uh, actions they take over this current
    issue of the cyber stutf

    2) but what I would ask Russia to do is
    to not – is – is – if anything – because I know you have to have some sort of action – to, to only
    make it reciprocal.

    3) but what I would ask Russia to do is
    to not – is – is – if anything – because I know you have to have some sort of action – to, to only
    make it reciprocal. Make it reciprocal. Don’t – don’t make it- don’t go any further than you
    have to. Because I don’t want us to get into something that has to escalate,

    “depending, actions they take over current issue of cyber stuff”

    “because I know you have to have some kind of action”

    “to only make it reciprocal. Make it reciprocal. Don’t – don’t make it- don’t go any further than you
    have to.”

    So it is true that Flynn did not ask R to refrain from escalating? Is this how we are to understand this???

    Liked by 1 person

    • Reserved55 says:

      👇 See Miller from Bezos Blog 👇

      Liked by 1 person

    • OlderAndWiser says:

      OK, so here is where I put my non-lawyer legal hat on:
      So there are two separate things the Obama administration did: one was to expel the diplomats and the second was to impose sanctions against the Russian intel agencies.
      Flynn asks him not to escalate the EXPELLING OF THE RUSSIAN DIPLOMATS, and that this could lead to continued escalation and complete shutdown of embassies.
      However, when Kislyak brings up the sanctions against the Russian intel agencies, Flynn doesn’t respond.

      The Mueller assholes conflated the two issues!!!!

      Liked by 4 people

    • WRB says:

      If you read the transcript, Flynn is saying do not escalate in response to 35 Russians being expelled from the US. Not due to sanctions.

      And it is not illegal to talk to the Russians, no matter what these commies FBI/DOJ types assert.

      The only mention of sanctions in the transcripts is by Kislyak:
      KISLYAK: We agree. One of the problems among the measures that have been announced today is that now FSB and GRU are sanctions, are sanctioned, and I ask myself, uh does it mean that the United States isn’t willing to work on terrorist threats?

      So the Flynn plea is BS. I think the FBI convinced Flynn that he misremembered the actual conversation.

      Anyway, the whole thing is BS… because it is not a crime to talk about sanctions in the first place, and it was a crime for the FBI to investigate him without a legal predicate…

      Liked by 2 people

  9. Reserved55 says:

    Communist left maintains there same lying posture since Trump

    Liked by 4 people

    • gsonFIT says:

      Miller is asshoe

      Liked by 5 people

    • John55 says:

      I see exactly zero mention of “sanctions” anywhere in there. Greg Miller is the one lying.

      Also, since we have never seen the 302’s, we don’t know what Flynn supposedly said to the FBI.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Bryan Alexander says:

      Sanctions? I didn’t see that mentioned at all. Flynn didn’t want retaliatory diplomatic actions to escalate. I didn’t see economic sanctions mentioned anywhere. “Sanctions” is a very broad term with various meanings. Diplomatic sanctions, economic sanctions, military sanctions. There was nothing for Flynn to lie about. And he KNEW that the conversation would be recorded somewhere.

      Again, it was/is a moving target. Change the definition of what is being discussed in mid-stream and BLAM, you just committed perjury.

      Liked by 6 people

      • jnr2d2 says:

        The only place “sanctions or sanctioned” is mentioned is by the Ambassador, and it related to (along w the 30 kicked out) as to whether these new ones affecting the FSB and GRU would affect US/Russia handling terrorist issues and situations. Flynn never answered, but with a “yeah” as typically “I hear you.” But clearly could not engage on that issue without a high level discussion at the Presidential level..

        Liked by 3 people

        • OlderAndWiser says:

          Exactly!!! I picked up on that also!
          The f*ing Mueller gang, and the media, conflated the two issues – purposely!

          Like

    • Mary Morse says:

      Sanctions refer to Magnitsky act sanctions. There’s no discussion of this.

      Like

    • Robert Smith says:

      Imagine a world where these “journalists” spent as much effort and thought in cross-checking and verifying facts in their original stories. It just as likely they just transcribe what their sources tell them.

      Like

    • Sammy135 says:

      The expelled Russians were not sanctions, they know they are purposely distorting it. The word sanctioned is mentioned by the Russian and all Flynn says.. yah, yah. Expelling staff and issuing sanctions on are two different things.

      The Russian Ambassador, who I think was working with the Obama Whitehouse from around May, 2016 to muddy up Trump people. This same Ambassador visited Obama in 2015, 50 times according to WhiteHouse logs and visited a few times during the election. Kislyak was getting praised on Twitter by Obama’s former Ambassador to Russia, the same person praising Kislyak is simultaneously tweeting Trump is a Russian stooge all during the election.
      Kislyak pestered everyone on Trump team for meeting with phone calls/emails, starting around May, many blew him off emails show. He did get one meeting with Sessions, which was then used to force Sessions to recuse himself, because he forget to mention it under weird questions during his hearing and the FBI under Comey used it to open up a investigation into Sessions for lying to congress (or the media reported he did but it wasn’t true) that is how insane FBI/DOJ were under Comey/Rosy

      He pestered Jared for meetings during the transition, his one meeting was used against Jared, supposedly on a phone call Kislyak said they talked about sanctions in the meeting, knowing he was being listened to, Jared denied it, but the media and the left made it into healines news.

      Then this, he was the one who CALLED Flynn, knowing his calls were being listened to. The Obama people wanted something compromising on Flynn, he was being helpful. That is why the FBI knew to listen Flynn’s calls because they were expecting him to talk to the Ambassador, that Kislyak was going set up Flynn.

      I bet that is why after being in DC for over 8 years Putin pulled Ambassador Kislyak out in 2017.

      Along with fact all Flynn said was to keep it appropriate, if wants expel try to

      Liked by 1 person

    • palafox says:

      “No way this just slipped” his mind.

      So, Imagine Samantha Powers forgetting SEVEN unmasking requests.

      Looks like she lied under oath. Round her up!

      Liked by 1 person

  10. rayvandune says:

    No, they wanted to be able to accuse Trump of doing what Obama had already done to him. Ho-hum, what else is new?

    Liked by 1 person

  11. nimrodman says:

    Grassley added:
    “After all the screw-ups and malicious behavior by FBI and DOJ officials during the Russia investigation, we simply cannot take them at their word anymore. We need oversight and transparency to sort out this mess.”

    Bingo

    Cannot take FBI at their word (looking at you, Wray)

    Nor DOJ
    … unless it’s a demonstrably truthful actor like Grenell and now Ratcliffe
    … Barr, I dunno yet – maybe

    https://nypost.com/2020/05/29/transcripts-of-michael-flynns-calls-with-russian-ambassador-released/

    Liked by 3 people

    • MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

      I believe we will get a clear signal from The Donald regarding Wray ….soon! Unless he was told to hold his fire by Trump/Barr/Grenell then he should be fired and soon.

      Liked by 2 people

  12. Sachmo says:

    When is Schiff going to release his parody cut? His Ukrainian parody was so hilarious.

    Liked by 4 people

    • TonyE says:

      He’s been uncharacteristically quiet, huh?

      I see that Mad Max was let loose for a change.

      Perhaps the Fascists are feeling the heat and are trying to lay low.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Anon says:

      Here you go!

      <ADAM SCHIFF:

      This is Flynn callin’ to setup a meetin’ between the Bosses.

      Boss to Boss… on the q.t. …. over the secure line.

      We’re takin’ over the territory in 3 weeks and we gotta decide howta split up the loot.

      And we don’t want your guys hittin’ r guys until after the powwow, capiche?

      I’ll be stayin’ down here in the Dominican, on the lam, until the heat’s off, so nobody should be wettin’ their beaks till I get back to DC.

      Like

  13. RockyBalboa says:

    This proves the President’s point – these are sick people. Who does this? No one should ever vote for any Democrat ever again. There is something in American life called a “transition” – the time one party leaves and another enters in. That’s how it works. For these to be hidden for so long show how corrupt these sick people are. I realized it was bad – but even this goes beyond the pale of all human decency. General Flynn did NOTHING.

    Liked by 5 people

    • MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

      With respect , I believe you’re underestimating the ignorance of the democratic voter.

      Liked by 6 people

      • DaughterofLiberty says:

        Democrats are now the new nazis of the world.

        Isn’t it interesting that Operation Paperclip brought a bunch over here following the collapse of the 3rd reich – one of whom was Mengele, who became Dr. Green – bringing his demented human experimentation and eugenics with him.

        Like

      • Raptors2020 says:

        Mitch:
        My Grandfather always voted for the Conservative Party in Canada.
        His children teased him that if the Tories nominated a collie dog, he’d vote for it.
        He conceded that was true: if the Party nominated a dog, then the Party must think that was best for the country.

        That is most Democrat voters in a nutshell. Total tribalism. Biden knows it: that’s what he meant when he said if a black doesn’t vote Democrat, he isn’t black. He’s out of the tribe.

        That’s why they might actually nominate Biden. He’s their collie dog.

        Like

    • Robert Smith says:

      Many Democrat voters do not care. They believe Republicans are evil in every way and that this far, far outweighs any “foibles” Democrats may have. So, basically, Republicans deserve to be stopped in any way possible. Democrat voters reward their Democrat warriors that do whatever it takes.

      Like

  14. John55 says:

    The larger question should be “Why was this transcript, which clearly shows that Flynn did nothing wrong, kept classified for all this time?”

    Liked by 8 people

  15. Reserved55 says:

    The Communist left will never quit lying. Swallowswell is a sociopath

    NBC

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Woj_Pawelczyk/status/1196763163242455043

    Liked by 1 person

  16. jus wundrin says:

    So where does this go from here? Judge sully drops the case? Stzrok is arrested? Van crack head fired?

    Flynn needs to be freed from bondage ASAP, so he can reminisce about the old times with hussein.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. WhiteBoard says:

    Flynn never talks about sanctions in the calls.

    Neverrrrr mentions sanctions.

    There can be no arrest or lying charge if it was based on sanctions talk, that is not in the very own transcripts.

    Color of law- crime solidified.

    They are fckd

    Liked by 4 people

  18. Trey Dawg says:

    That was a level headed, constructive phone call Flynn made to Kislyak to de-escalate the situation Obama tried to escalate. Flynn had every right to speak to the ambassador and only said competent, clear messaging consistent with what Trump wanted said. The only one butt-hurt is Obama. He wanted to set Russia policy for Trump/Flynns administration and Flynn called it what it was. A situation created by the PREVIOUS administration. This is the kind of phone call that makes me feel represented in the government.

    Liked by 3 people

    • DaughterofLiberty says:

      Assuming Flynn engaged in making representations to another country which are totally contrary to the out going admin’s policies – someone tell me what’s wrong with that??? Let’s assume Flynn said something along the lines of “Yeah – the Obama people really screwed the pooch over X-Y-Z, and we intend to walk that back.” What the heck is wrong with that? If Flynn misrep’d the incoming’s intentions, then its up to the incoming to deal with it – not the outgoing. There’s no Logan Act issue whatsoever – Flynn was legally entitled to make whatever representation the transition team authorized him to make. Jug Ears and his despicable crew needs to be held accountable. (“Enemies DOMESTIC”)

      This has always strictly been an issue to bolster the propaganda the Hag et al was using to account for her defeat.

      Like

  19. pageoturner says:

    There is NOTHING inappropriate in the transcripts but the smoking gun that caused the Obama panic is 12/31/16 call where Kislyak tells Flynn Russia didn’t retaliate because they learned Obama’s actions expelling the Russians were “targeted not only against Russia, but also AGAINST THE PRESIDENT ELECT.”

    Kislyak went on to say “people are dissatisfied with the lost of elections”

    Russian spies knew Obama was undermining Trump.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Raptors2020 says:

      Many Democrats, then and now, would not be able to make the distinction between disloyalty to Obama, and disloyalty to America.

      Including Judge Sullivan.

      Liked by 1 person

  20. islandpalmtrees says:

    Do the “tech cuts” sent to Yates match the “tech cuts” received by the White House? Repeat the same sequence for Obama on 1/4/2017. I am expecting to see a miss-match.

    Like

  21. martyb59 says:

    In the very first paragraph, a previous phone conversation is mentioned. Has that conversation been released?

    Liked by 1 person

    • TarsTarkas says:

      The MSM will scream ‘that is the real phone call Flynn liked about!’

      Like

    • Reserved55 says:

      Look at the transcript on Scribd.

      Page 4
      Dec 23rd call

      It mentions previous call but if you read and compare to page 9
      Dec 23rd call

      It also mentions previous call but if you read it they are two different sujects discussed, or two different calls.

      Screw up ???

      Like

      • Reserved55 says:

        Just remembered:

        According to Sidney Powell and others, Flynn was in the Dominican Republic and the calls repeatedly dropped.

        To me it looks like a mistake was made with the transcripts.

        Like

  22. Dave Hunter says:

    I feel very sad for General Flynn, that this was done to him. People need to go to jail.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Tl Howard says:

      And elected officials like Swalwell should be able to be criminally liable for slander but I guess they aren’t.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Perot Conservative says:

      I hope he has loads of White Hot, Cold Anger.

      Collects $10 Million from the government, $20 Million from Covington law firm, gives Sidney Powell a chunk … and re-joins the fray in the Swamp. With a driver & Military protection.

      Liked by 1 person

      • DaughterofLiberty says:

        X 10,000 !!!

        Like

      • OlderAndWiser says:

        10M? I think more like 50-100M. And bankrupt Covington.
        There may be some ability to sue SchitFace/SwallorWell etc for their comments OUTSIDE Congress. Libel. They KNEW he did not discuss sanctions. But kept that story up – and are still keeping it up.

        Liked by 1 person

  23. Deplorable Canuck says:

    Can someone remind me again what was Flynn supposed to have lied about?

    Liked by 3 people

  24. Putting On Its Shoes says:

    Important point:

    Flynn calls contained no hint of illegality. Therefore, the Justice Department’s argument that there was no valid predicate or case to interview Flynn as a target or a witness to illegality stands.

    Second, the Obama regime, and their minions, claim that it is illegal to have a different policy than them going forward. Hint, it’s not.

    Their arrogance made them mad that Trump was going in a different direction.

    They were way over their skis before the election, and they completely lost their minds after the election.

    Liked by 3 people

    • jnr2d2 says:

      Not to mention the FBI team investigating Flynn recommended closing it on Jan 4, 2017 (and they had all the CR cuts to inform their decisions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) & 7th floor hijacked the Flynn matter that day. Obama big meeting next day(5th) and his chief of staff unmasked Flynn before that meeting. The unmasking after the 5th seemed to me to be CYA for Biden, Brenham, Yates etc. since they were in the meetings with Obama on the 5th!!!!!!!!!

      Liked by 1 person

  25. gsonFIT says:

    Adam Schiff is saying these two gentlemen discuss a response to Russian Election Interference

    Like

  26. Conservative_302 says:

    I LOVE JOHN RATCLIFF! Praise the good Lord. He delivered.

    Liked by 5 people

  27. Anon says:

    This Adam Schiff’s version:

    This is Flynn callin’ to setup a meetin’ between the Bosses.
    Boss to Boss… on the q.t. …. over the secure line.
    We’re takin’ over the territory in 3 weeks and we gotta decide howta split up the loot.
    And we don’t want your guys hittin’ r guys until after the powwow, capiche?
    I’ll be stayin’ down here in the Dominican, on the lam, until the heat’s off, so nobody should be wettin’ their beaks till I get back to DC.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Alex Pazzo says:

    How will the MSM spin this???
    “Look he spoke to rusiannnssss”

    Like

  29. Bogeyfree says:

    We now know for a fact the following…….

    DNC Server Hack – WAS A FRAUD

    The Dossier – WAS A FRAUD

    4 FISA Warrants on the Court – WERE BASED ON A FRAUD

    The arrest of PAPAD – WAS A SETUP AND A FRAUD

    Halper and Mifsud being Russian Agents – WAS A FRAUD

    Gen Flynn – WAS SETUP

    The Charge of Gen Flynn lying – WAS A COERCED FRAUD

    Russia Collusion – WAS A FRAUD

    The Mueller Investigation – WAS A FRAUD

    Impeachment – WAS A FRAUD

    Bottom line – IMO and the evidence is showing this – EVERYTHING WAS A FRAUD FROM THE BEGINNING!

    IMO the MINIMUM charge Barr MUST bring is SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY to take down a sitting President of the United States.

    Now if Barr will just look back to 2009-2016 and the massive spying done on Americans including judges, the. We have a whole new level of charges IMO.

    AG Barr – DO NOT STOP AT 2016/2017 – GO all the way back to 2009-2016 and investigate.

    Liked by 11 people

    • Perot Conservative says:

      Good summary.

      Ad to that the FBI, DOJ, Stats Dept, Treasury, ONI, SSCI, Congress & Five Eyes were all in on the Conspiracy.

      Likely Durham would never frame it that way – but it is surely the leadership, typically political, in those organizations. I’m not sue how much of NSA was involved.

      Like

      • jnr2d2 says:

        I worked for NSA. NSA is a vacuum cleaner sucking up and filing everything (and making and breaking codes) they are not the user, but a resource.

        Like

    • Erik Heter says:

      Man, Trump needs to retweet that.

      Like

    • Mary Morse says:

      Mifsud was literally paid by the EU Commission, a member of the Union for the Mediterranean, thru EIB funding of EMUNI University when he was it’s president. His colleague and EMP member, Gianni
      Pittella campaigned for Hillary at the DNC convention in July 2016.

      Gates Foundation has lots of connections to the EU Commission, EIB, and China in it’s malaria/HIV/vax work in Africa, green energy, and covid.

      Makes me wonder about those Clinton emails blind cc’d to the chinese connected entity, as well as Clinton Foundation aids work in Africa on the Epstein express.

      (Timeline necessary.)

      Like

  30. Bubby says:

    The corrupt msm continues to divide this country with their false reporting. Unbelievable how he can read those transcripts and tweet such bullshit! I hate the corrupt msm beyond words!

    Liked by 2 people

  31. Perot Conservative says:

    Big Point 2?

    So far, Ratcliffe is following up in the steps of Rick Grenell. Praise the Lord.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Wethal says:

      I like to think that when Grenell was appointed, he called up Ratcliffe, and said, “Jon, what would you like me to get started on while you’re waiting to be confirmed?”

      Like

  32. dallasdan says:

    Surely, Ratcliffe’s releases will impact the appeals court’s opinion about Sullivan’s malfeasance. JMO

    Liked by 2 people

    • MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

      Don’t pop the cork just yet. These people never admit they’re wrong. Now they will change the subject . Maybe even tell you have their education.

      Like

  33. Lion2017 says:

    Thank you Ric Grenell for having the decency to do what so many others failed to do!

    Liked by 6 people

  34. gsonFIT says:

    I enjoy this website and initially came here to learn about the FISC and 702 Surveillance. I have learned many things, become upset about events and then excited about others. But one thing that really sticks for me is Sundance writing about how your emotions can prevent your brain from carrying out rationale thought. This is a life lesson for all.

    I think it is now a given that The Trump Derangement Society has absolutely no control of their emotions. It is like they are listening to another language.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Anon says:

      If you really want to know something “about how the world is run”, I really recommend this video:

      The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes

      How Russia-gate Met the Magnitsky Myth

      Near the center of the current furor over Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 is a documentary that almost no one in the West has been allowed to see, a film that flips the script on the story of the late Sergei Magnitsky and his employer, hedge-fund operator William Browder. ~ via Consortium News

      It starts off slow..then down the rabbit hole it goes. It will really make your jaw drop. And this is the choice the United States gives the world: the difference between us and China.

      😦

      Totally worth the time, if you have not seen the film already!!!

      Like

  35. Erik Heter says:

    Not only does this prove that Flynn did NOT commit any crime, it’s another piece of evidence proving that the SCO and members there of DID commit crimes.

    Liked by 3 people

  36. Bubby says:

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/flynn-kislyak-transcripts-after-dni-declassification

    FTA ““These transcripts clearly demonstrate that Lt. General Michael Flynn. lied to the FBI and the Vice President when he denied discussing sanctions in a then-secret set of conversations with the Russian Ambassador,” Schiff said in a statement Friday. “Flynn posed a severe counterintelligence risk because the Russians knew the real contents of Flynn’s communications and that he lied about them to the some of the most senior officials in the U.S. government.”…Schiff added that the transcripts “fully affirm” that “Flynn in fact lied about his interactions with the Russian Ambassador.” “It should be no surprise that the President and his allies wish to promote conspiracy theories to distract and re-write history, as the true facts and history are so damning,” he said.”

    This is the corrupt msm spin on the Flynn transcript! The country is divided beyond repair and I don’t how it will all end. Just exercise your God given 2nd Amendment right and be prepared for whatever comes next!

    Liked by 1 person

    • gunrunner03 says:

      We’re foolish if we ever think the Left is going to cry “uncle.” Ain’t happening. Ever. This is a war. They are, and will forever, on the attack. Republicans need to wake-up to this fact.

      Liked by 2 people

  37. bessie2003 says:

    Those were perfectly fine calls. Tech cuts not so much.

    Like

  38. Drogers says:

    You attempt to destroy a man’s life because you don’t like his politics.

    I’m no expert on the classics but would appear most of the gang will be shown their future living quarters at Dante’s Eighth {Fraud} and Ninth {Treachery} Circle of Inferno.

    Like

  39. gsonFIT says:

    can someone tell me what this says? I think it is in Russian.

    FLYNN falsely stated that he did not ask Russia’s Ambassador to the United States (“Russian Ambassador”) to refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against Russia

    if a double negative is a positive statement, that make a triple negative… still negative?

    Like

    • WRB says:

      It is convoluted, but can still be classified as “intelligible English.”

      It says: Flynn lied
      when he told us
      that he did not tell Russia
      whatever

      Of course, the irony is that this plea is stating a fiction. Flynn never told Russia what that plea states, in particular, in response to sanctions

      The FBI made that part up, never showed him nor his attorneys the transcript, and coerced him into agreeing to a lie. Maybe Flynn thought to himself that he misremembered the conversation, and believed the FBI story.

      Whatever, we know the FBI knew the truth, and made-up that statement. They should suffer at least the same punishment that Flynn has been put through. At the least!

      Liked by 1 person

  40. bessie2003 says:

    Thank you Director Ratcliffe! Thank you so very much!

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Tiffthis says:

    Excuse my ignorance, but what part is the transcript and what part it the CR cuts? Also, why aren’t their 2 side to each date? Shouldn’t transcripts of “12/31/16” also have a corresponding CR cut with the date “12/31/16”?

    Like

    • OlderAndWiser says:

      The actual transcripts have FLYNN: and KISLYAK: in the front of every statement made. The cuts have statements that mention what was talked about.

      Liked by 3 people

  42. Pokey says:

    I think there are so many bad actors over the last 13 years that no amount of unredacted data will ever bring closure to this stinking chapter of our history. We just have to go after the instigators who could order the others around and hope we manage to corner a few of them before the election. I don’t think we will see the key people get prosecuted this year because they will be found only at the core of this onion.

    The good guys have to keep trying because the bad guys have already gotten several years of a head start on them. All We can do is defeat as many of these traitors at the polls as possible this Fall and hope that we have done enough to turn the tide in the enormous smelly rotten DC Swamp. I am praying to God to give us one more chance to keep our freedom.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. I would have thought this would make it all clear, however, the media is doubling down and actually inferring that it says things that it obviously doesn’t say. Miller from Washington Post is adamant it proves Flynn was lying, by inferring that it couldn’t mean anything else… This isn’t going to change anyone’s minds so stop with all the unnecessary explaining or truth seeking for the media. Screw them all, no more wasted effort… JUST LOCK THEM UP!!!!! Start arresting and go to the punishment stage. Don’t worry about the left, just put them in jail.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Issy says:

      Charles: Agree, no need to waste energy or breath, If they have something they can be prosecuted for, they should be, otherwise forget it and move on with something you can control.

      Like

  44. Bubby says:

    Exactly!

    Liked by 4 people

    • Wethal says:

      Whoever signed the original criminal complaint could be in some criminal and professional trouble for lying in a pleading – perjury or false swearing – whatever it is in the US Code. And lying to the court is a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility that could get some bar discipline.

      Bar complaints are confidential until a final ruling, but the fact of a disciplinary referral would affect Van Grack’s eligibility for malpractice insurance should anyone want to hire him after he leaves the DOJ. Yes, there are sleazy law firms who wouldn’t care that much about Van Grack’s tactics, but if he could raise their malpractice premium, that would be another matter.

      I assume Barr is keeping Van Grack around to control him, and possible have Durham squeeze him for any info useful to the grand jury. Or maybe to let the little worm twist in the wind a bit.

      Liked by 3 people

      • MagaMia says:

        Speaking of malpractice insurance (MI), in August 2017, some SCO members reportedly purchased MI after just a few months into the their scam investigation. Wonder how that will work out for them if they need to use it……

        Like

        • Issy says:

          MagaMia: I don’t know why they would need it. Prosecutors working under the auspices of the doj are immune from civil charges of misconduct. It’s why they do what they do and get away with it. I think the doj as an entity can be sued, but not individuals.

          Like

    • Robert Smith says:

      Look at Rice’s expression.

      Like

    • Jase says:

      I keep re-reading that section posted by Miller. Either my comprehension skills are shot, or he has some special ability to read invisible writing, because nowhere in there can I see lengthy discussion about sanctions.

      Liked by 2 people

  45. OlderAndWiser says:

    My first thoughts on reading the transcripts are that they are not just exculpatory towards Gen. Flynn – but they are also exculpatory towards PDJT and any accusations that he or his campaign colluded with the Russians.
    Note: Putin keeps asking for a secure call with PDJT, as is normal between the leaders of the these two nuclear powers. If there was ANY collusion between the two of them, there would have been a back channel – and no need to keep asking for this secure call!!!
    Also, Kislyak talks about the sanctions impacting their intelligence branches, and that these intelligence branches are what would help in the middle east stability issues. Again, (a) if there was a back channel, this would have been known! and (b) Flynn’s response is to – not respond. He is not saying the intelligence agencies were innocent – he doesn’t want to address the issue; he just wants to focus on middle east stability!

    Totally separate, there seems to be some evidence in these calls that the Russians knew about the US intel agencies being against PDJT. Kislyak seems to refer to this; also in the initial cross talk of some other people, it appears they also refer to the US intel folks being behind hacking. (Hacking of what, I don’t know.)

    Like

    • Issy says:

      OlderAndWiser: The only accusation of hacking that I know of was the alledged hack of DNC emails by the Russians. There has never been any proof showing they were hacked by Russia. The intel agencies told us they were is all we have. At this point, who believes them?

      Like

      • OlderAndWiser says:

        Issy, that is the known hacking that the US intel agencies used to frame PDJT.
        However, I believe that Clinton’s servers were also hacked – by at least 3 different countries. Additionally, many countries (including the US) hack other countries sensitive systems – modern spyware.
        So, I’m not sure what the Russians were discussing there. The probability is they were discussing the DNC server hacking – but who knows.
        And I totally agree with you on who hacked the DNC servers – there has never been any proof that Russia did them. Just innuendo.

        Liked by 1 person

  46. MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

    For 8 years the Obama/Clinton Cabal did anything and everything they wanted without fear of them ever losing another Presidential election and then Lardazz lost. Their arrogance is what is going to take them out. They believed if they got an investigation going into The Donald they would find so much stuff he did wrong that he would just call Two Men and a Big Truck and head back to Trump Towers and the good life. 30/40 million and they found nothing,zip,zero, nada. Now they can’t put Jack back into the Box.

    I hope all those bastards get what they deserve.

    Liked by 5 people

  47. Brutalus says:

    What are the FSB and GRU sanctions? (asking for myself)

    Like

  48. Paul Deignan says:

    Well, what do we learn from this?

    1. The Dems are not just spinning, they are lying maliciously through their teeth–to include Obama and all his cronies. This shows that his administration was essentially corrupt and subversive to American values. If you had any doubt, there is no need to doubt. The Dem party is an enemy to America.

    2. Flynn is a little cooky. I am really surprised that Flynn did not resolve things with Pence and Trump at the time. He had nothing to be ashamed about and he was to be the guy that the President needed to rely on for tough advice. I’m a bit surprised that Flynn was not tougher through all of this knowing what we know to be at stake.

    3. Trump was not ready for prime time. Trump did not display the sort of judgment that anyone familiar with Dem tactics should have had. He talked tough at the inauguration, but the people he put in were powder puffs compared to the tough-minded people he needed. I am surprised by this.

    4. Washington has not corrupted Trump–it seems that he was the right man for the times. What a damn mess! Only an outsider could apparently clean it up. So much work yet to do.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jim in TN says:

      No President is capable of fulfilling 3 by himself. They build teams that winnow the field and make recommendations.

      Every President ends up with leakers and infighting. You have to build a big coalition to win, and you have to reward supporters of every faction with positions.

      Trump’s staffing troubles are greater than other Presidents because too many betrayers were selected. Starting with his team to find people.

      Speaking of that, many of the reasons suggested for Obama and Company to oust Flynn condemn every NSA Trump has had after Flynn.

      If Flynn would have uncovered the crooked use of Intelligence, why didn’t anybody else?
      If Flynn would have cleaned out the Obama holdovers, why didn’t anybody else?

      Like

      • Paul Deignan says:

        You seem to be agreeing with me, but maybe missing the point.

        The 3rd point is that I am surprised by how politically naïve Trump was. He is a smart guy and has dealt with Dems all his life. He went through the campaign and he should have known what the opposition was capable of and what drives them. Yet, his appointments were people that had a blind spot for this until lately when Trump was being beaten over the head by this treason.

        Anyone that reads the nonsense from Obama could tell he is a socialist. This is what socialists do. Trump should have known it.

        I am very surprised. The only reason I can think to expunge Trump is that he is a bit of a liberal at heart himself so blind to what political liberalism is in fact.

        Liked by 1 person

        • meow4me2 says:

          Mitch McConnell. There’s your answer. He couldn’t get everyone he wanted. He got what swampy Mitch would give him.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Paul Deignan says:

            The saying here is, “When you are in charge, lead”.

            Another saying is, “Personnel is policy”.

            So I am saying that I am surprised that Trump settled for less since I think he knew about the other two maxims. How could he settle for less?

            Like

    • Issy says:

      Paul: With everything going on in the first weeks of a new administration and to be hit with this absurdity was too much to handle. It was a full-court press against Flynn, the intel agencies, the media & the dems.

      Top that with no support from his party leaders, I believe Trump thought it would be best not to go to war over this at that particular time. Best for him politically and best for Flynn, in that they would back off prosecuting him.

      Like

      • Paul Deignan says:

        Has compromising on this key aspect helped him or hurt him?

        I think the answer is obvious.

        Knowing that, then I would not say that Trump was stupid in this way that you suggest. Yes, he seems to compromise too much for my likes, but the more I think of it the more I think there is something deeper.

        When you are facing an implacable foe, you know you need to fight, It’s fight or die. Running scared will get you dead with certainty.

        When you are fighting evil-minded people, you know to fight. Compromise is a delusion.

        I think Trump had never thought about the nature of the fight. He thought that he could negotiate a deal because that is the sort of thing he did all his life and how he made his fortune. I don’t think that Trump realized that at this new level that the issues are existential. And I think it is only of late that he is beginning to grasp what should have been clear to a blind man–this is a fight to the death.

        Either we win, or the country dies. Until Trump was impeached, I don’t think he realized that there is nothing that will stop the Dems from destroying the country if they can. They are simply evil-minded, what mind they have. This is not a misunderstanding, it is what it is. They are they enemy and they must be politically destroyed. They are not the “opposition party”–they are committed root and branch to the destruction of the country and of what is good. Much like the Kim regime.

        This sort of thinking gets in the way of making deals so it is naturally anathema to the old Trump. But the new Trump must learn and learn quick that this is what is actually at stake in this winner take all game. This is a whole new world and it became this way when the DPRK got nukes and when the Dems became the party of personality (Feeling), not ideology. The reptilian mind that they represent knows nothing of limits and respect–it is an all-consuming Id which has no place in government.

        Trump must learn and get tough. Nature eats the weak and naïve. The good must also be the strongest. And the good fights evil, it does not compromise. Trump must understand this.

        Like

        • Issy says:

          Paul: I don’t believe I implied Trump was stupid. In my opinion, he is brilliant. Trump is as tough as they come but not evil. He was not naive about the corruption, but I think he was surprised at the pure evil and the depts these people were willing to go to in achieving their goal of destroying him. I believe he thought he could compromise with the political leaders and get things done. It has always worked that way in D. C.

          Like

          • Paul Deignan says:

            My understanding is that you believe Trump was being pragmatic and that he prioritized his battles.

            My point is that he is smart enough to know that without the right people in, he will not be fully successful. So then why did he do it?

            My answer is that he did not understand.

            He was using his old playbook of deal making, but not realizing that at the top, it is the rule of the jungle–that is where rules are made. He is used to working under the rules. So he made the mistake of not realizing this fact which was well known by his opponents. Also, he did not understand, in this context, the true nature of his opponents in the fight.

            This is not to say that he is stupid. He did the same thing with the DPRK. This is to say that he is learning and to learn like he must, he needs to be tougher minded and to have good tough minded advisors.

            He only lately moved this way when he preferred Pompeo over Tillerson (remember Tillerson and Mattis betrayed him on the DPRK stance just before the H-bomb demonstration). Pompeo is good, but he is still not as tough minded as he should be.

            Trump himself made a big mistake not shooting back at Iran (remember he played the situation as if Iran was standing down–that was delusion). But Trump did this with the full support of all his Obama era generals who he should not have trusted for such advice. They simply are unable to think clearly since they subordinate military judgement to their own self-serving career political judgement.

            I thought this point that I learned how naïve Trump was in terms of politics was worth emphasizing since our country depends on it. This became even clearer to me when I see how he let Flynn out to hang over Dem treachery. He should have known the game was no-holds barred and he should have fought like a tiger.

            Like

            • Paul Deignan says:

              BTW, just in case Trump et al. are keeping track, I did say at the time that if Flynn had lied to Pence, then Trump was right to fire him.

              I also said that I was surprised by Flynn since he should have known himself that Obama was spying on him and he should have been clear on what he was saying.

              What we find out now is that Flynn did not lie, but he still took a fall (repeatedly) for lying which I mention here, baffles me. That strikes me as “cooky”.

              …just in case anyone is keeping count. My advice at the time was correct for what I was given. Flynn knew he didn’t lie, but Flynn allowed himself to take a fall. This was not only stupid, it was “cooky” in my book. People with integrity need to fight.

              Like

  49. MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

    Chuck put Wrong Way Wray on the clock. Unless Barr/Trump/Durham asked Chris to stand down on this info then Wray should be turn in his keys tonight. We’ll see. Grenell isn’t going back to MerkleVille. The Donald can move him in the batting lineup.

    Liked by 2 people

  50. laughernyc1 says:

    Virtually no discussion of the Obama SANCTIONS on the Russian intel agencies. Only of the EXPULSIONS. So Flynn quite correctly could have said he did not recall discussiing the SANCTIONS. You have to take the broad definition and INCLUDE “expulsions” as “sanctions” while the actions taken by Obama were distinct and separate.

    Can count on no MSM to point this out.

    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