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.

On May 2, 2020, the DOJ, using new information gathered by U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, declassified and released a segment of James Comey testimony that was previously hidden.  Within the transcript Comey says Pientka wrote the Flynn 302 on January 24th immediately following the interview. [Screengrab below – pdf here ]

That January 24, 2017, version of the 302 is the one that has gone missing.

People defending the FBI have even said it never existed.  However, the testimony of FBI Director James Comey proves the 302 was drafted on January 24th.

Additionally, 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:

(more…)

First things first: ♦Understand Obama’s Surveillance Operation HERE.  ♦Michael Flynn wasn’t under a FISA (Title-1) HERE …. that’s the background.

The riddle of how the White House discovered the telephone call and subsequent content between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak appears to have been solved. The FBI used a “Pen Register.”  There was no unmasking, and no warrant.

A pen register is a device/process which records the telephone numbers of outgoing calls.  Monitoring outgoing call numbers does not require a search warrant or FISA.

After the 2016 election Lt. Gen Flynn was given a government issued secure cell phone; a blackberry device for use.  However, with Flynn under a preexisting FBI investigation the phone numbers Flynn was calling in December ’16 and January ’17 were being monitored.

A review of prior testimony by former FBI Director James Comey [HERE]; prior testimony by former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe [Here]; and a cross-reference of recent releases of Flynn unmasking documents [Here] tells the full story.

In December of 2016 incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was under a sketchy FBI Counterintelligence investigation for possible coordination with Russia.  According to recent documents and the Comey transcript, the Flynn investigation began in the summer of 2016; that investigation was ongoing in late December.

After President Obama initiated sanctions against Russia on December 29, 2016. The Obama administration was trying to figure out why Russia was not reacting.  According to James Comey testimony the intelligence community, writ large, was tasked to find out why Russia was not reacting more severely.  See Transcript:

(more…)

It’s always worthwhile to revisit past assertions and denials when presented with new evidence.  Consider this…

During an interview on April 26, 2019, former Deputy National Security Advisor to President Obama, Ben Rhodes, told a journalist the Obama White House didn’t even know there was an FBI investigation into President-elect Trump or Michael Flynn.  WATCH:

.

If the White House didn’t know about an FBI investigation into Michael Flynn (per Ben Rhodes), then how does President Obama tell the FBI to conduct their investigation “by the book” according to Ben Rhodes boss, National Security Advisor Susan Rice.  See the problem?

(more…)

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

Former Judge John Gleeson (U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of New York) recently penned an op-ed in the Washington post arguing that Flynn should continue to be prosecuted.

(more…)

First things first: ♦Understand Obama’s Surveillance Operation HERE.  ♦Michael Flynn wasn’t under a FISA (Title-1) HERE …. that’s the background.

Devin Nunes appears with Lou Dobbs to discuss the recent list of Obama-era officials who unmasked NSA intercepts of Michael Flynn talking to foreign government officials.  Rep. Nunes reminds the audience that Flynn is only one person within a much larger group of Trump transition team members who were under surveillance by Team Obama.

(more…)

For the sake of understanding this specific release, “unmasking” occurs when the NSA, eavesdropping on foreign communications, sweeps up communications with U.S. citizen. That is known as “incidental collection.”

When the intelligence about that communication is shared across the government, the names of U.S. citizens in the communication are typically concealed or masked to protect their identities. However, the names can be unmasked if U.S. officials make the request.

In this release [pdf here], the Obama-era NSA was monitoring various foreign government officials and within their communication they picked up contacts with incoming President-elect Trump’s National Security Advisor Lt. General Michael Flynn.  This release only includes NSA intercepts; not other intelligence agency reports; only the NSA.

The NSA generated [redacted number] of reports based on those foreign contacts. The reports are actual transcripts of the conversations.  The Obama-era officials then asked the NSA to unmask the name of General Flynn so they could see the content and context of the calls.  Current DNI Ric Grenell has assembled a list of who asked the NSA to unmask incoming NSA Michael Flynn from November 8, 2016 through January 31, 2017.

It is important to remember, these intercepts are part of the normal function of monitoring foreign communications.  There is nothing nefarious about the monitoring and there is nothing nefarious about a foreign person contacting the incoming administration, via General Flynn, to begin preparing for the change in administrations.

However, what is completely alarming and disturbing, is the extent to which the Obama administration went to share the contacts and transcripts of the calls with a myriad of government officials.  That’s where the list comes in.

(more…)

There has been a shift; it’s subtle, it’s nuanced, but it’s there.  Against the revelations that Ric Grenell has declassified multiple component parts of weaponized intelligence used against candidate, President-elect and President Trump; and with the unmasking data as only one part of that larger component grouping; DOJ Spokesperson Kerri Kupec says: “what happened to candidate Trump was one of the greatest political injustices in history.”

While AG Bill Barr doesn’t need to sign-off on the specific wording by the DOJ spox, the overarching public statement would never be articulated without institutional approval.  The AG cannot make public comments that are too strong, but authorizing the spokesperson to articulate the position is one way to accomplish the same.  WATCH:

.

Insufferably Martha MacCallum ‘pretends not to know’ the distinction in intelligence equity; she asks the same question repeatedly.  The answer is clear.  DNI Ric Grenell has presented one component group of intelligence data, the identity of the unmaskers and who they unmasked, to the DOJ.  The DNI retains ownership and can release.

(more…)

First things first: ♦Understand Obama’s Surveillance Operation HERE.  ♦Michael Flynn wasn’t unmasked, nor under a FISA (Title-1) HERE That’s the background.

After Acting DNI Richard “Ric” Grenell delivered a volume of declassified intelligence records to Attorney General Bill Barr it was reported that Grenell delivered a file showing the intelligence unmaskers from the Obama administration; pending Barr release.

Today ABC is reporting from senior DOJ officials “”we do not intend to release the [unmasking] list” that Grenell brought over to the building last week.”

Considering the content of the files likely delivered to AG Barr it is worth remaining patient.  No-one is more cynical than me about DOJ hiding stuff; but this ain’t that.

The declassified documents are not a DOJ equity, they are a DNI equity, the DNI can release them.  For the DOJ the declassified documents are evidence.

Kevin Corke and Adam Housley are both reporting the documents delivered by Grenell extend beyond unmasking; their reporting makes sense.  The bigger topic is political surveillance.  The surveillance encompassed numerous intelligence equities.

(more…)

It appears we are about to find out if one of my long-standing theories about surveillance of Michael Flynn is correct.  Flynn was not “unmasked”, because he was the direct target.

For three years the official media account of how the intelligence community gained the transcript of incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn talking to Ambassador Sergey Kisliyak on December 29th, 2016, surrounded “incidental collection” as a result of contact with an agent of a foreign power.

Meaning the Flynn call was picked up as the U.S. intelligence apparatus was conducting surveillance on Russian Ambassador Kisliyak.

If this version of events were accurate (it’s not), it would fall under FISA-702 collection: the monitoring of a foreign agent (Kislyak) who has contact with a U.S. person (Flynn).

In order to review the identity of the U.S. person, a process called ‘unmasking’, a 702 submission must be made. As NSA Director Rogers said: that submission, the unmasking, leaves a paper/electronic trail.  However, I do not think that is what happened, here’s why:

Back in 2017 Senator Lindsey Graham questioned former DAG Sally Yates and former DNI James Clapper.  Within the questioning, Sally Yates tipped her hand.  There was never an unmasking of Flynn because Flynn was a target; it was not incidental collection. WATCH:

.

Sally Yates doesn’t directly say Flynn was a target, but by now we all know he was a target of the FBI investigation.  As a result of Flynn being the actual target he would be directly identified within the intelligence documents because the investigation would be about him, and not incidental. But there’s more…

(more…)

Representatives Jim Jordan and Andy Biggs tear the bark off the Obamagate scandal; including culpable republicans who participated in the DC coup effort.

Appearing with Lou Dobbs on Fox Business, Jim Jordan rips through the timeline early in the interview to expose how it was impossible for all of the activity to be happening without former President Obama being a participant.  WATCH:

(more…)