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

a reply to: carewemust

The 302s are just notes on an interview aren't they? Not supposed to be a transcript.

a reply to: BrennanHuff

It means someone is misinterpreting two words in an email.
Here's two more that got a lot of laughs... Secret Society...
It's still hilarious.

originally posted by: Pyle

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

But you don't know he did... you are relying on the word of obviously partisan hacks in the FBI who had an agenda.

Now I know, I know... if it's a Progressive agenda then it's fine with you.

By Any Means Necessary, of course.

The long-winded:

a reply to: theantediluvian

And the short-ended:

a reply to: Sillyolme

Please never stop y'all! You do more for President Trump and the good of America than you will ever likely comprehend.

To everyone else: We don't patiently deconstruct for the willfully ignorant, but for the silent majority who are waking up and looking for truth and wander in. It's that silent majority that benefits when you deconstruct the cognitively dissonant like those above.

If the law is applied fairly then most of us have no quibble, but the law hasn't been applied fairly--not even close--and the damage to our nation has been great. Possibly even fatal. How some of you can excuse the obvious abuse is disturbing.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

The 302s are just notes on an interview aren't they? Not supposed to be a transcript.

Wait till they tell you some of those 302s are forged.

And wait till you see how Flynn might be part of the Strategy.

It's gonna be a kill-shot when it gets exposed.

It's a classic "Castling" 😎🚬

a reply to: xuenchen

The Dems are in for a hellstorm in the coming months before midterms.

GEOTUS playing 5D chess, Dems playing 2D checkers.

originally posted by: NorthernLites
a reply to: xuenchen

The Dems are in for a hellstorm in the coming months before midterms.

GEOTUS playing 5D chess, Dems playing 2D checkers.

Democrats are playing Chinese Checkers with square marbles.

😀

a reply to: xuenchen

I won''t hold my breath though.

a reply to: Lumenari

Flynn and his lawyer both signed it.

a reply to: The GUT

I'm pretty sure nothing I do helps or hurts trump.
The rest of that is conspiracy theory 101. Govt control us. But some of us are special and see through the cabal agenda because we're awake and see the truth while the rest of you are sleeping or sheeping I'm never sure. Blah blah.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

The 302s are just notes on an interview aren't they? Not supposed to be a transcript.

Since I know you won't bother to go look it up on your own:

What is a 302?

FBI form FD-302 has space to list the name of the agents, the date of the interview, the name of the interviewee, the place of the interview and so forth. Then it allows the agent to draft a memo—in paragraph form—of what the witness said. It can be one page long or twenty pages long, depending on the length of the interview.

The memo section of a 302 is the key part. This is a combination of what the agent was able to write down during the interview and his recollection. It may list the questions and the answers or simply be a narrative of what the witness said.

The witness generally doesn’t see the 302 or get a chance to correct any mistakes he thinks are in it before it is finalized.

emphasis mine

Many problems listed after the above excerpt, this one happens to be one of the biggest:

Fourth, there’s no requirement that the FBI agent write down everything the witness says or that the agent take any notes at all. There’s nothing to prevent the agent from stopping the note-taking if the witness says something helpful to the target of the investigation. Because it’s nearly impossible to obtain the handwritten notes underlying a 302 during discovery, the FBI is not concerned that anyone can prove a conflict between the notes and the final 302 anyway.

Why do they do this instead of actually recording interviews?

You may be wondering why the FBI doesn’t simply record every interview, given all the issues I’ve described. That would fix the problem, right? No one could dispute what was asked or what the witness answered.

The reason is that the official DOJ policy is not to record witness interviews. A 2006 FBI memorandum explained that recording interviews would impede the FBI’s ability to successfully question witnesses. (Why this is absurd is a topic for another day.)

What is an FBI 302? The Problematic Nature of FBI Agents’ Interview Memos

(deconstruction complete)

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lumenari

Flynn and his lawyer both signed it.

You really have no clue how much pressure a special council with unlimited funding and the resources of all American intelligence agencies can put on a person, do you?

/facepalm

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: The GUT

I'm pretty sure nothing I do helps or hurts trump.
The rest of that is conspiracy theory 101. Govt control us. But some of us are special and see through the cabal agenda because we're awake and see the truth while the rest of you are sleeping or sheeping I'm never sure. Blah blah.

You meant Bahh Bahh and it autocorrected, I'm assuming....

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical


(deconstruction complete)

And, as always, with style and competence, J&C.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Pyle

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

But you don't know he did... you are relying on the word of obviously partisan hacks in the FBI who had an agenda.

Now I know, I know... if it's a Progressive agenda then it's fine with you.

By Any Means Necessary, of course.

Then why did Flynn sign off on the indictments in the form of a plea deal? If the indictment is off base why isnt Flynn himself making a stink of it? Why isnt his lawyer out advocating for his client (something a lawyer is required to do)? Why is it only GOP committee heads in congress looking for ANYTHING they can to smear the FBI but not the person who this effect directly? Why did this happen hours after Nunes did a 180 on the FISA scandal?