FBI lost General Flynn records

[colfax_m]

Except that’s not what they said. No where is it written that the agents were of the opinion that he told the truth.

Their conclusion that he wasn't lying is not the same as he was telling the truth? So what is the middle-ground between the two?

They concluded he was lying. All the agents said was that he didn’t give physical indications he was lying. That doesn’t mean they thought he was telling the truth. They knew he wasn’t telling the truth.

Hmmm. Must be the new math or something. I was raised at a time you were either telling the truth or you weren't. If you weren't telling the truth, then you were lying. If you are telling the truth, then you're not lying.

But then again, I'm old fashioned and also from the days when there were only two genders, and you had no choice but to be what God made you.

He wasn’t telling the truth. None of the agents said he was telling the truth.

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

 

[wamose]

He will probably pardon, thinking it a good technicality. Multi page confessions signed by ignorant defendants, co-signed by their very competent and experienced lawyers and presented to the courts without complaint by defendants professing their guilt mean very little these days. If you're part of the chosen few, you can probably mount up with mafia Don trump for target practice down 5th avenue.

Why did the FBI destroy Flynns records?

the Deep State must have something to hide

And Robert Wray is the biggest obstructer of all. That dude has been covering up for criminal FBI agents since he was appointed. AG Barr is no better for turning a blind eye to Wray.

The FBI is a monster without a leash

Wray and Barr are just passing through but the monster will still be there after they are gone

I believe you're right. I guess I'm just pissed because they had me believing Barr and Durham were straight shooters who were going to get to the truth and prosecute the criminals. But as it turns out they're just effing around waiting for the clock to run out and people to forget about the coup.

Remember that Barr and Durham are not part of the cabal. They don't leak crap to the press every chance they get. The report will not be out until summer, and before making judgements, it's best wait to see what they have or don't have.

I used to have your optimism, Ray, but I lost it. I'm just not used to shit taking so long. It sure looks like they're running out the clock just like they did with Hillary so many times. That doesn't mean I quit rooting for justice. I just have no hope for it or our legal system if they do sweep this coup under the rug.

 

[Mac-7]

In this case that there was not unanimous agreement that flynn did something wrong

And what would that prove?

That the FBI had a political agenda

How would that prove there was a political agenda?

The conclusion is reenforced by other evidence such as emsils between the usual suspects in the Deep State

You haven’t explained the lack of unanimity would demonstrate a political agenda. Do you know who filed charges against Flynn?

The Deep State filed charges against flynn

 

[Mac-7]

Their conclusion that he wasn't lying is not the same as he was telling the truth? So what is the middle-ground between the two?

They concluded he was lying. All the agents said was that he didn’t give physical indications he was lying. That doesn’t mean they thought he was telling the truth. They knew he wasn’t telling the truth.

Hmmm. Must be the new math or something. I was raised at a time you were either telling the truth or you weren't. If you weren't telling the truth, then you were lying. If you are telling the truth, then you're not lying.

But then again, I'm old fashioned and also from the days when there were only two genders, and you had no choice but to be what God made you.

He wasn’t telling the truth. None of the agents said he was telling the truth.

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Without the documentation you dont know what the agent said

 

[colfax_m]

And what would that prove?

That the FBI had a political agenda

How would that prove there was a political agenda?

The conclusion is reenforced by other evidence such as emsils between the usual suspects in the Deep State

You haven’t explained the lack of unanimity would demonstrate a political agenda. Do you know who filed charges against Flynn?

The Deep State filed charges against flynn

Good evasion, but that’s just not very specific.

Who filed charges against Flynn and where are the emails that reinforce evidence that those people were politically against him?

Also, how are any of these allegations material to the facts of the matter?

 

[colfax_m]

They concluded he was lying. All the agents said was that he didn’t give physical indications he was lying. That doesn’t mean they thought he was telling the truth. They knew he wasn’t telling the truth.

Hmmm. Must be the new math or something. I was raised at a time you were either telling the truth or you weren't. If you weren't telling the truth, then you were lying. If you are telling the truth, then you're not lying.

But then again, I'm old fashioned and also from the days when there were only two genders, and you had no choice but to be what God made you.

He wasn’t telling the truth. None of the agents said he was telling the truth.

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Without the documentation you dont know what the agent said

From the court documents:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

Is there any evidence to doubt the veracity or this claim? I mean, we could ask the agents, no?

Who determines if someone commits obstruction? The agents or the prosecutor?

 

[Mac-7]

That the FBI had a political agenda

How would that prove there was a political agenda?

The conclusion is reenforced by other evidence such as emsils between the usual suspects in the Deep State

You haven’t explained the lack of unanimity would demonstrate a political agenda. Do you know who filed charges against Flynn?

The Deep State filed charges against flynn

Good evasion, but that’s just not very specific.

Who filed charges against Flynn and where are the emails that reinforce evidence that those people were politically against him?

Also, how are any of these allegations material to the facts of the matter?

You are asking me for the conclusions of a criminal investigation of the Deep State that has not been conducted yet

if you are on the jury - if there ever is one - we will try to convince you

but till then I’m just giving you my opinion

 

[colfax_m]

How would that prove there was a political agenda?

The conclusion is reenforced by other evidence such as emsils between the usual suspects in the Deep State

You haven’t explained the lack of unanimity would demonstrate a political agenda. Do you know who filed charges against Flynn?

The Deep State filed charges against flynn

Good evasion, but that’s just not very specific.

Who filed charges against Flynn and where are the emails that reinforce evidence that those people were politically against him?

Also, how are any of these allegations material to the facts of the matter?

You are asking me for the conclusions of a criminal investigation of the Deep State that has not been conducted yet

if you are on the jury - if there ever is one - we will try to convince you

but till then I’m just giving you my opinion

Im asking for evidence you claimed exists that supports your conclusion.

As far as I can tell, you don’t have any.

 

[Mac-7]

Hmmm. Must be the new math or something. I was raised at a time you were either telling the truth or you weren't. If you weren't telling the truth, then you were lying. If you are telling the truth, then you're not lying.

But then again, I'm old fashioned and also from the days when there were only two genders, and you had no choice but to be what God made you.

He wasn’t telling the truth. None of the agents said he was telling the truth.

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Without the documentation you dont know what the agent said

From the court documents:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

Is there any evidence to doubt the veracity or this claim? I mean, we could ask the agents, no?

Who determines if someone commits obstruction? The agents or the prosecutor?

You mean from the final and official version of the surviving court documents that were scrubbed of dissenting points of view

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why did the FBI destroy Flynns records?

the Deep State must have something to hide

And Robert Wray is the biggest obstructer of all. That dude has been covering up for criminal FBI agents since he was appointed. AG Barr is no better for turning a blind eye to Wray.

The FBI is a monster without a leash

Wray and Barr are just passing through but the monster will still be there after they are gone

I believe you're right. I guess I'm just pissed because they had me believing Barr and Durham were straight shooters who were going to get to the truth and prosecute the criminals. But as it turns out they're just effing around waiting for the clock to run out and people to forget about the coup.

Remember that Barr and Durham are not part of the cabal. They don't leak crap to the press every chance they get. The report will not be out until summer, and before making judgements, it's best wait to see what they have or don't have.

I used to have your optimism, Ray, but I lost it. I'm just not used to shit taking so long. It sure looks like they're running out the clock just like they did with Hillary so many times. That doesn't mean I quit rooting for justice. I just have no hope for it or our legal system if they do sweep this coup under the rug.

I understand where you're coming from, but I'm not one to give up hope. Barr didn't have to look into any of this, but he decided to on his own, or perhaps with a little encouragement by the President. It was his choice to hire Durham.

Now that we have new people in the mix, let's see what they do. I sense fear in the Democrats, and that's a great sign, just like their phony impeachment was out of fear. It told me Trump was onto something they didn't want anybody finding out.

 

[colfax_m]

He wasn’t telling the truth. None of the agents said he was telling the truth.

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Without the documentation you dont know what the agent said

From the court documents:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

Is there any evidence to doubt the veracity or this claim? I mean, we could ask the agents, no?

Who determines if someone commits obstruction? The agents or the prosecutor?

You mean from the final and official version of the surviving court documents that were scrubbed of dissenting points of view

Who dissented?

 

[Mac-7]

The conclusion is reenforced by other evidence such as emsils between the usual suspects in the Deep State

You haven’t explained the lack of unanimity would demonstrate a political agenda. Do you know who filed charges against Flynn?

The Deep State filed charges against flynn

Good evasion, but that’s just not very specific.

Who filed charges against Flynn and where are the emails that reinforce evidence that those people were politically against him?

Also, how are any of these allegations material to the facts of the matter?

You are asking me for the conclusions of a criminal investigation of the Deep State that has not been conducted yet

if you are on the jury - if there ever is one - we will try to convince you

but till then I’m just giving you my opinion

Im asking for evidence you claimed exists that supports your conclusion.

As far as I can tell, you don’t have any.

I am not trying to convince you of anything

my opinion is gathered over time and most of my sources are not sitting on the shelf waiting for you to ask

 

[Mac-7]

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Without the documentation you dont know what the agent said

From the court documents:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

Is there any evidence to doubt the veracity or this claim? I mean, we could ask the agents, no?

Who determines if someone commits obstruction? The agents or the prosecutor?

You mean from the final and official version of the surviving court documents that were scrubbed of dissenting points of view

Who dissented?

By name I dont know

 

[colfax_m]

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Without the documentation you dont know what the agent said

From the court documents:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

Is there any evidence to doubt the veracity or this claim? I mean, we could ask the agents, no?

Who determines if someone commits obstruction? The agents or the prosecutor?

You mean from the final and official version of the surviving court documents that were scrubbed of dissenting points of view

Who dissented?

By name I dont know

You don’t even know if any did dissent or why it matters if they did.

You’re just fishing for anything to confirm your opinion.

 

[sparky]

Maybe the FBI should just lose Gen Flynn.....

~S~

 

[depotoo]

Their conclusion that he wasn't lying is not the same as he was telling the truth? So what is the middle-ground between the two?

They concluded he was lying. All the agents said was that he didn’t give physical indications he was lying. That doesn’t mean they thought he was telling the truth. They knew he wasn’t telling the truth.

Hmmm. Must be the new math or something. I was raised at a time you were either telling the truth or you weren't. If you weren't telling the truth, then you were lying. If you are telling the truth, then you're not lying.

But then again, I'm old fashioned and also from the days when there were only two genders, and you had no choice but to be what God made you.

He wasn’t telling the truth. None of the agents said he was telling the truth.

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Wrong, once again. You are twisting it. Period.

 

[colfax_m]

They concluded he was lying. All the agents said was that he didn’t give physical indications he was lying. That doesn’t mean they thought he was telling the truth. They knew he wasn’t telling the truth.

Hmmm. Must be the new math or something. I was raised at a time you were either telling the truth or you weren't. If you weren't telling the truth, then you were lying. If you are telling the truth, then you're not lying.

But then again, I'm old fashioned and also from the days when there were only two genders, and you had no choice but to be what God made you.

He wasn’t telling the truth. None of the agents said he was telling the truth.

Wrong-
The 302 report stated that Strzok and the other agent “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
Flynn Interview Documents | Making False Statements | Federal Bureau Of Investigation

Been explained a million times. All the agents said was that he gave no physical indications he was lying.

That doesn’t mean they thought he wasn’t lying. Quite the opposite.

Wrong, once again. You are twisting it. Period.

You’re the one twisting it. This is what the court documents said:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

 

[Mac-7]

Without the documentation you dont know what the agent said

From the court documents:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

Is there any evidence to doubt the veracity or this claim? I mean, we could ask the agents, no?

Who determines if someone commits obstruction? The agents or the prosecutor?

You mean from the final and official version of the surviving court documents that were scrubbed of dissenting points of view

Who dissented?

By name I dont know

You don’t even know if any did dissent or why it matters if they did.

You’re just fishing for anything to confirm your opinion.

The dissent has been reported

if we had a robert mueller to dissect the Deep State we could answer your questions

 

[Thinker101]

So after destroying his life & the life of his family (and many others also), the FBI is now reporting that the records have been lost....WTF.

Trump considering 'full pardon' for Michael Flynn after FBI 'lost' records

He will probably pardon, thinking it a good technicality. Multi page confessions signed by ignorant defendants, co-signed by their very competent and experienced lawyers and presented to the courts without complaint by defendants professing their guilt mean very little these days. If you're part of the chosen few, you can probably mount up with mafia Don trump for target practice down 5th avenue.

Why did the FBI destroy Flynns records?

the Deep State must have something to hide

Who said the records were destroyed?

Sidney Powell

“For months, Powell has insisted that the original draft of the FBI’s notes from its interview with Flynn has gone missing. In one September 2019 filing, Powell asked the judge to help produce “the original draft of Mr. Flynn’s 302 and 1A file, and any FBI document that identifies everyone who had possession of it.””

The original draft? Why would anyone keep drafts?

Dood, WTF!! Draft/original/copy...who the hell cares, they lost/disposed them.

 

[colfax_m]

From the court documents:

Finally, the interviewing agents did not observe indicia of deception and had the impression at that time that the defendant was not lying or did not think he was lying. See Strzok 302 at 4. Members of the Presidential Transition Team were likewise misled by the defendant’s false denials. Those misimpressions do not change the fact—as the defendant has admitted in sworn testimony to this District Court—that he was indeed lying, and knowingly made false statements to FBI agents in a national security investigation. Those false statements were material, including by raising the question of why he was lying to the FBI, the Vice President, and others.

Is there any evidence to doubt the veracity or this claim? I mean, we could ask the agents, no?

Who determines if someone commits obstruction? The agents or the prosecutor?

You mean from the final and official version of the surviving court documents that were scrubbed of dissenting points of view

Who dissented?

By name I dont know

You don’t even know if any did dissent or why it matters if they did.

You’re just fishing for anything to confirm your opinion.

The dissent has been reported

if we had a robert mueller to dissect the Deep State we could answer your questions

I doubt that it has been “reported”.