Robert Mueller lied....transcripts of actual Flynn call show Mueller lied in his report...

2aguy

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2014
111,956
52,217
2,290
Of course he lied. He and the 13 Trump hating lawyers he hired didn't think anyone would ever see the actual Flynn phone call transcripsts...

They were wrong...

The transcript of the December 29 conversation, which was cited by Mueller, does not include a request from Flynn that Russia “refrain from escalating” in response to U.S. expulsions of Russian diplomats. According to the transcript, Flynn asked Kislyak for Russia’s response to be “reciprocal” so that the U.S.–not Russia–would not be forced to escalate beyond the expulsions. The transcript makes clear that Flynn fully expected Russia to respond to the situation by expelling U.S. diplomats in response to the Obama administration’s move to expel nearly three dozen Russian diplomats from the U.S., and that his primary concern was preventing a situation where the U.S. would have to escalate tensions in response to Russia.

“Make it reciprocal,” Flynn reportedly said. “[D]on’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.”


“I really don’t want us to get into a situation where we’re going, you know, where we do this and then you do something bigger, and then you know, everybody’s got to go back and forth and everybody’s got to be the tough guy here, you know?” Flynn continued. “We need cool heads to prevail, and uh, we need to be very steady about what we’re going to do because we have absolutely a common uh, threat in the Middle East right now.”

“We agree,” Kislyak responded.

Later in the conversation, Flynn again used the word “escalate” in reference not to a potential Russian response, but to what he hoped the United States would not have to do in response to Russian actions.

“If you have to do something, do something on a reciprocal basis,” Flynn said. “And, and then, we know that we’re not going to escalate this thing[.]”


Mueller’s operation also conflated discussions of financial sanctions levied against Russian entities and individuals via executive order on December 28, 2016 with the expulsion of Russian diplomats, which were two separate and distinct issues. In fact, the specific executive order cited by Mueller in his charging documents against Flynn pertained only to Treasury-enforced financial sanctions against nine Russian intelligence individuals and institutions, not to the separate expulsions of Russian diplomats, which were enforced by the U.S. State Department. In his remarks announcing the various maneuvers by his administration against Russia, President Obama even noted that sanctions and expulsions were entirely separate issues handled by different agencies and requiring different legal authorities.

“I have issued an executive order that provides additional authority for responding to certain cyber activity that seeks to interfere with or undermine our election processes and institutions, or those of our allies or partners,” Obama said at the time. “Using this new authority, I have sanctioned nine entities and individuals: the GRU and the FSB, two Russian intelligence services; four individual officers of the GRU; and three companies that provided material support to the GRU’s cyber operations.”


 
The intercept transcripts and summaries released on Friday afternoon cover calls between Flynn and Russian ambassador Kislyak or his representatives on December 22, 2016; December 23, 2016; December 29, 2016; December 31, 2016; January 12, 2017; and January 19, 2017. The substance of the December 22 conversation remains entirely classified, while the remaining transcripts and conversations are only lightly redacted.

So you are saying that this again, is a summary and NOT the entire REAL transcript.
 
It s very hard to see any reason other than a strong bias against Trump and his supporters to open the investigation that became Crossfire Hurricane, the Mueller investigation, and much of what followed from that. I can see a preliminary investigation to see if anyone from Trumps campaign tried to get in touch with a Russian agent to obtain whatever dirt they could on Hillary. But I do not see how that pertains to our national security, it's just dirty politics as usual, as we saw from the Clinton campaign paying Steele to dig up dirt on Trump. Based on what we saw in the Strzok/Page email chains, it is quit clear that Strzok in particular had an extremely strong bias against Trump, and this is the guy that started the investigation going.

Look, if the FBI is going to investigation the opposing party's presidential campaign, how does that not go all the up to the top to be approved? How do you have NO ONE signing off on the Strzok document, nothing that indicates the investigation of that impact was reviewed and agreed to? Answer: plausible deniability. If the investigation was truly legit, then somebody higher up would have and should have signed off on it. I believe that IS department policy when the FBI is about to surveill an American citizen, you don't have one lower level guy justifying his own investigation. If national security really was at stake, then I see no reason why getting full approval from higher up would be a problem.
 
Amazing how all these paid for protests broke out as the Dems knew this was coming down and no attention is being paid to this.
 

Forum List

Back
Top