It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Grassley Demands 302’s from Wray and Rosenstein on Flynn Testimony

page: 1
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2018 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Grassley is wondering why Flynn would enter a guilty plea for lying to the FBI when Comey testified to Grassley's committee that the agents that interviewed Flynn didn't think Flynn lied.

The FBI doesn't record or transcribe their interviews. Agents use FD-302 forms a.k.a 302's in order to report/summarize the interviews that they conduct. This means that Flynn's charges are based entirely on these 302's. So naturally, Grassley asked for the DOJ/FBI to turn over the 302's, as well as some other documents (transcript of Flynn-Kislyak call, the FBI report summarizing the call, agent's notes, etc.) over a year ago. As you might have guessed, the DOJ/FBI didn't comply, so now Grassley is asking again but now he also asked for a transcribed interview with a Joe Pientka, presumably the agent who, along with Strzok, interviewed Flynn.

Grassley also explains why the DOJ/FBI has no excuses this time for turning over the documents. The investigation is over, Flynn already submitted a guilty plea. On top of that the judge presiding over Flynn's case ordered the Special Counsel to turn over all potentially exculpatory information, meaning that, as long as the Special Counsel actually complied, Flynn's attorneys already have all the information Grassley is asking for. Basically, Grassley: "If Flynn's attorneys already have this information, why can't I/we (congressmen) have it as well?


www.judiciary.senate.gov...(Flynn%20Transcript).pdf




posted on May, 11 2018 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: NorthernLites

It is called grand standing..

It is popular now These days for republicans to run around bashing the fbi and pretending like the whole world is i a vast conspiracy to make the gop look bad..

When their talking points are so stupid no one who ever took a debate class should fall for them..


+13 more 
posted on May, 11 2018 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: NorthernLites

It is called grand standing..

It is popular now These days for republicans to run around bashing the fbi and pretending like the whole world is i a vast conspiracy to make the gop look bad..

When their talking points are so stupid no one who ever took a debate class should fall for them..


I feel truly sorry for you if you actually believe any of what you just said. The fact that the FBI has been involved in a charade of charades to obfuscate and hide information for the sole purpose of preventing people from learning that they were doing what they were doing, to attempt to hurt Trump is now common knowledge. (It was obvious to many long before it became common knowledge).

Your reply is reminiscent of the lowest quality excuses and whining heard after Hillary lost on the night of Trump's huge win.

Please don't stop, it's even funnier than Nancy Pelosi's new campaign promises to raise taxes on everyone.

edit on 11-5-2018 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Pilot to bombardier .....

10 minutes to target .....

You are authorized to use nuclear weapons !!!

By November, lots of Sun.Burns will happen to lots of left-over implants and deep state swampers.

😎🌊



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

From the looks of things Grassley has not read the indictments,

Flynn Indictment

Because he did far more then just lie on that one interview Grassley is being cagey about.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: xuenchen

From the looks of things Grassley has not read the indictments,

Flynn Indictment

Because he did far more then just lie on that one interview Grassley is being cagey about.


Then let the 302 back it up. Let's see what the indictment was actually based on.

Keep up here sparky... this isn't rocket science, after all.

Grassley is trying to see why the indictment says that Flynn lied about something when even the agents who ambushed Flynn with an "interview" didn't think he was lying.


edit on 11-5-2018 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: xuenchen

From the looks of things Grassley has not read the indictments,

Flynn Indictment

Because he did far more then just lie on that one interview Grassley is being cagey about.


Then let the 302 back it up. Let's see what the indictment was actually based on.

Keep up here sparky... this isn't rocket science, after all.

Grassley is trying to see why the indictment says that Flynn lied about something when even the agents who ambushed Flynn with an "interview" didn't think he was lying.



If what Grassley says is true then the 302s showing they didnt think he was being deceitful during the interview doesnt change the fact that he indeed lied. Being a good liar doesnt change the fact that he lied. Here is the indictment again so you can read exactly what he lied about.

Flynn Indictment



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Flynn might be able to beat this on appeal if any corruption is shown in the future.

Yes, you can appeal a plea bargain if you can show corruption.

😎🚬



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Hard to believe we allow the FBI to get away with 302's. They're obviously a tool for deceit and butt-covering and ridiculous for the "world's premier law enforcement" agency. WHY wouldn't important questionings be recorded?

Time to tear down the crooked and deformed FBI who ran a scam crime lab for years, missed the 9/11 hijackers, missed a multitude of school shooters, and have hounded innocent folk to death and let other innocent folk be jailed until their death and rebuild the top echelon from proven field agents and not political appointees and their political appointees.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Pyle

Flynn might be able to beat this on appeal if any corruption is shown in the future.

Yes, you can appeal a plea bargain if you can show corruption.

😎🚬


Sure, but that is flynn's laywer's job to prove not Grassley. So why hasnt flynn's people been all over this possible corruption? Why has it been fishing expedition after expedition by the GOP in congress? Why are the GOP going out of their way to be Flynn's lawyer?



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

They await the soon to be IG report bombshell.

Unlike the last Administration, they are doing things the long legal way now.

😎⏳



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

If the IG report shows that FBI 302's were altered, as claimed, Flynn will go free.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 03:37 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

"To hurt trump" as a theoretical objective belies the weakness of the theory. The reason for this nonspecific objective is that there's no real substantive conspiracy theory to speak of, just innuendo. Imagine a conversation between a "theory" advocate and skeptic:

"It was all a plot to hurt Trump!"
"How did they intend to hurt Trump?"
"They used the dossier to get a FISA warrant for Carter Page."
"How did the surveillance of Carter Page actually hurt Trump?"

What's your response to that? If it was a conspiracy by the FBI/DOJ, they failed miserably to achieve any results. Consider what Grassley is essentially alleging here. It's inconsistent with the theory. He's insinuating that the FBI passed up on going after Flynn for lying and therefore there's something fishy about the Mueller team doing it.

If there was a conspiracy to "hurt Trump" why wouldn't they have seized on Flynn's lying immediately? And worse yet, if this conspiracy existed for months before the election, why didn't they take any actions that would have actually had some impact, had some chance of hurting Trump's chances of getting elected?

Had these masterminds orchestrated a series of leaks and fostered rumor similar to how the FBI's NY office was running amok to damage Clinton's campaign with Giuliani and Kallstrom running to Fox, there's a good chance that they could have had an actual impact.

The answer to why they did nothing of the sort is usually something along the lines of, "They thought she was going to win!" which begs the question, then what was the motivation for this theoretical conspiracy in the first place?

"Well duh, to hurt Trump!"



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle




Why are the GOP going out of their way to be Flynn's lawyer?

It isn't that they are acting as Flynn's lawyer.

Certain lawmakers are interested in the DOJ being impartial. Not necessarily just Republicans, and certainly not all of the Republicans are interested in impartiality.

The fact that so few Democratic lawmakers seem to be interested in cleaning up what is obviously a corrupt group is telling though.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 05:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

"To hurt trump" as a theoretical objective belies the weakness of the theory. The reason for this nonspecific objective is that there's no real substantive conspiracy theory to speak of, just innuendo. Imagine a conversation between a "theory" advocate and skeptic:

"It was all a plot to hurt Trump!"
"How did they intend to hurt Trump?"
"They used the dossier to get a FISA warrant for Carter Page."
"How did the surveillance of Carter Page actually hurt Trump?"

What's your response to that? If it was a conspiracy by the FBI/DOJ, they failed miserably to achieve any results. Consider what Grassley is essentially alleging here. It's inconsistent with the theory. He's insinuating that the FBI passed up on going after Flynn for lying and therefore there's something fishy about the Mueller team doing it.

If there was a conspiracy to "hurt Trump" why wouldn't they have seized on Flynn's lying immediately? And worse yet, if this conspiracy existed for months before the election, why didn't they take any actions that would have actually had some impact, had some chance of hurting Trump's chances of getting elected?

Had these masterminds orchestrated a series of leaks and fostered rumor similar to how the FBI's NY office was running amok to damage Clinton's campaign with Giuliani and Kallstrom running to Fox, there's a good chance that they could have had an actual impact.

The answer to why they did nothing of the sort is usually something along the lines of, "They thought she was going to win!" which begs the question, then what was the motivation for this theoretical conspiracy in the first place?

"Well duh, to hurt Trump!"


What does an Insurance policy mean to you?

Sorry, didn't write 13 paragraphs speaking jargon to confuse the slow!



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 05:42 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

So the texts btween fbi amd doj people talking about bringing down trump...you just ignore those?



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 05:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: theantediluvian

So the texts btween fbi amd doj people talking about bringing down trump...you just ignore those?


The Alex Jones of the Alt Left!!!



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 07:47 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Funny how you can give a big picture overview on why this must be dumb

Yet when it comes to specifics you have nothing to say

How many posts do you have on the thread showing the fbi lost chain of custody on Hillary’s server?

Oh that’s right, you ignored that one cause it doesn’t fit your narrative of the fbi being great stand up people

The evidence is overwhelm that the fbi was incompetent or corrupt

As to this specific thread

First to answer your question why the fbi didn’t go after Flynn before the election

Yes, they thought Hillary would win

Mueller wanted Flynn to flip, so he charged Flynn and threatened to go after his son (or the fbi did) and so Flynn plead guilty.

Who knows, maybe Flynn did lie, and if so he should be charged.

But another thing you constantly ignore is both mills and abedin lied to the fbi, yet for some reason they weren’t charged (continuing the theme of trump people being charged for the very crimes that Hillary people are not charged with)

Why is the fbi fighting for over a year to not release the documents Grassley wants if there is nothing to hide?

I see you also ignored that.

Grassley letter specifically says that seeing as how the charges against Flynn are done and it’s just sentencing left, how could releasing those documents jeopardize the case?

The answer as you no is as long as they are on the level, it wouldn’t



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Whether they thought he was lying or not doesn't matter. He lied. That's what he was charged with. Because even if they didn't think he lied ... He lied.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Yeah.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join