Image 01 Image 03

DOJ Documents: Rosenstein Expanded Russia Probe Beyond Scope, Obama and Biden Knew Details From Flynn’s Wire-Tapped Calls

DOJ Documents: Rosenstein Expanded Russia Probe Beyond Scope, Obama and Biden Knew Details From Flynn’s Wire-Tapped Calls

This is a big deal.

The Department of Justice dropped its case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn on Thursday due to new information.

The DOJ also released documents in its motion. These documents showed President Barack Obama knew details from Flynn’s wire-tapped calls, and then-Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein expanded the Russia-Trump collusion probe beyond its primary scope.

Michael Flynn

Obama knew the details from the wire-tapped call between Flynn and then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in December 2016, which surprised then-Deputy Attorney Sally Yates.

It shocked Yates due to Obama’s “own history with Flynn.” He fired Flynn “as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014” due to insubordination. Flynn claimed Obama fired him over “his aggressive stance on combating Islamic extremism.”

Obama even encouraged incoming President Donald Trump not to hire Flynn.

From Fox News:

On January 5, 2017, Yates attended an Oval Office meeting with then-FBI Director James Comey, then-Vice President Joe Biden, then-CIA Director John Brennan, and then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, according to the newly declassified documents, including an FD-302 FBI witness report. They were discussing Russian election interference, along with national security adviser Susan Rice and other members of the national security council.

After the briefing, Obama asked Yates and Comey to “stay behind,” and said he had “learned of the information about Flynn” and his conversation with Russia’s ambassador about sanctions. Obama “specified that he did not want any additional information on the matter, but was seeking information on whether the White House should be treating Flynn any differently, given the information.”

A previous memo from Rice stated that Biden also stayed behind after the main briefing had ended.

At that point, the documents showed, “Yates had no idea what the president was talking about, but figured it out based on the conversation. Yates recalled Comey mentioning the Logan Act, but can’t recall if he specified there was an ‘investigation.’ Comey did not talk about prosecution in the meeting.”

The exhibit continues: “It was not clear to Yates from where the President first received the information. Yates did not recall Comey’s response to the President’s question about how to treat Flynn. She was so surprised by the information she was hearing that she was having a hard time processing it and listening to the conversation at the same time.” Yates would later say that she was concerned Flynn would be vulnerable to blackmail because of his interactions with Russia.

Another portion revealed why the FBI began an investigation into Flynn in August 2016:

The FBI offered only three reasons: that Flynn was “cited as an adviser to the Trump team on foreign policy issues February 2016; he has ties to various state-affiliated entities of the Russian Federation, as reported by open-source information; and he traveled to Russia in December 2015, as reported by open-source information.”

The “state-affiliated entities” line was an apparent reference to Flynn’s paid appearance at a Moscow gala for Russian state TV network RT in 2015. Flynn also reportedly received thousands more in expenses covered by the network and in speech fees from other Russian firms, including some payments that he initially didn’t disclose on ethics forms. The payments raised eyebrows on Capitol Hill, although Republicans pointed out that many other prominent officials, including Bill Clinton, have traveled to Russia for highly paid speaking engagements.

Disgraced former FBI agent Peter Strzok used those reasons to open the investigation, “even though Flynn’s speaking engagements in Russia were public knowledge.” The FBI can only “open such counterintelligence probes only when there is a reasonable and articulable basis to believe that criminal activity has occurred or that a threat to national security may exist.”

Documents last week showed the FBI closed its case against Flynn because agents could not find anything to hold against him. But Strzok pressured the agency to keep the investigation open in January 2017. The papers also looked like the FBI wanted to set-up Flynn.

Trump-Russia Collusion Probe

In mid-May 2017, Robert Mueller became special counsel for a probe into possible collusion between then-candidate Trump’s campaign and Russia.

But the DOJ documents showed Rosenstein expanded the probe beyond its original scope. A memo from August 2017 outlined Rosenstein’s requests, but some of it remained redacted until now:

Previously, it had been revealed that in May 2017, Rosenstein authorized Mueller to probe “i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; [and] iii) any other matters within the scope of [obstruction of justice laws].”

But, Rosenstein’s later August 2017 scope memo had remained largely redacted. The newly released version of the document makes clear that Rosenstein didn’t hesitate to explicitly authorize a deep-dive criminal probe into the Trump team that extended well beyond Russian interference efforts. (A third scope memo was also drafted.)

For example, let’s look at “low-level former Trump foreign policy aide” George Papadopoulos:

In the case of George Papadopoulos, a low-level former Trump foreign policy aide, Mueller was authorized to probe whether there had been a “crime or crimes” committed when he allegedly acted “as an unregistered agent of the government of Israel,” the new, lesser-redacted scope memo states. Papadopoulos has previously told Fox News that federal authorities tried to entrap him to secure a conviction under the Foreign Agents Registration Act [FARA], and that money in a safe in Greece might shed light on the purported scheme.

FARA is a little-known statute which, from 1966 to 2015, had been utilized only seven times. But, FARA prosecutions have picked up dramatically in recent years, and prosecutor Brandon L. Van Grack was appointed to head up the new FARA unit at the DOJ in 2019.

Note: Van Grack appeared in those documents on Flynn released last week. He apparently “failed to provide evidence to Flynn’s attorneys that anti-Trump former FBI agent Peter Strzok intervened to instruct the FBI case manager handling the Flynn investigation to keep the probe open, even after the Washington field office of the FBI wanted to close the case for lack of evidence. ”

Rosenstein’s memo also mentioned Flynn:

The newly released version of the 2017 scope memo further makes clear that Mueller could look into whether Flynn “committed a crime or crimes by engaging in conversations with Russian government officials during the period of the Trump transition.”

That was an apparent reference to the Logan Act, which has never been used in a modern criminal prosecution and had a questionable constitutional status; it was enacted in 1799 in an era before telephones and was intended to prevent individuals from falsely claiming to represent the United States government abroad. Republicans and constitutional law experts have questioned the Logan Act’s role in a modern prosecution; law professor Jonathan Turley said it was “chilling” that the FBI apparently was trying to premise a case on the Logan Act.

Rosenstein also allowed FARA to look “into Flynn’s dealings with Turkey.

Then there’s Carter Page and Paul Manafort. Along with Papadopoulos, Rosenstein instructed Mueller to “specifically” investigate if those men and other officials “committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 election for President of the United States.”

Collusion is not considered a crime, which means Mueller had the ability to “investigate any foreign involvement by these officials in search of some criminal activity.”

However, the memo told Mueller that “Manafort was under a probe for possible collusion and criminal activity.”

Doc 198 Govt Motion to Dism… by Fox News on Scribd


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


2smartforlibs | May 8, 2020 at 11:04 am

It boils down to they had nothing and told Mueller to find something even if they had to make it up and don’t call me till you do. I’ll call you.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to 2smartforlibs. | May 8, 2020 at 11:09 am

    What’s that famous Hillary Clinton quote about this?

    Oh yes……

    ” if Trump is elected president, we’re all going to hang we’re all going to hang we’re all going to hang! “

    Concise in reply to 2smartforlibs. | May 8, 2020 at 1:12 pm

    They had the Logan Act. Unbelievable. They actually, with straight faces, predicated an investigation of a transition official on the Logan Act. Even more unbelievably it was used to define the scope of a special counsel investigation. To even utter the phrase “Logan Act” should have resulted in immediate dismissal. This is an historic level of corruption. Mostly from an institutionally corrupt DOJ. I don’t intend to impugn Barr’s efforts but without serious, comprehensive reform, it will be business as usual when the next democrat administration slimes into power.

      Terence G. Gain in reply to Concise. | May 9, 2020 at 7:50 am

      The Logan Act obviously wouldn’t apply to members of the incoming administration. It was obviously a pretext.

      Terence G. Gain in reply to Concise. | May 9, 2020 at 7:50 am

      The Logan Act obviously wouldn’t apply to members of the incoming administration. It was obviously a pretext.

        Milhouse in reply to Terence G. Gain. | May 10, 2020 at 12:14 pm

        Technically it does. But seriously, it’s almost certainly unconstitutional, as applied to anyone, let alone an incoming administration.

I have mixed feelings on Flynn, he did plead guilty to charges, underlying reasons why are worthy of discussion. I am not always a fan of pardons, but Trump may need to pardon Flynn to prevent a future admin / doj from bringing charges up again when the political winds change.

    tmiker in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 11:35 am

    My understanding is the case is to be dismissed with prejudice, so they can’t get him for this. Of course, the DOJ/FBI/IC have proved themselves capable of prosecuting anyone for anything, regardless of realities, so they can make up something else in the future.

    rdmdawg in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 11:39 am

    You do understand that his confession means nothing, right? Thousands of people are ‘convicted’ every day by forced confessions in totalitarian states, it’s a common tactic. We do not live in a police state (though times might be a’changin’) thankfully. General Flynn is a patriot, and there are absolutely no ‘underlying reasons’ worthy of anything.

    Shut down the FBI and the DoJ would be the best course now. What are these worthless agencies good for except to be used as tools of the Democrats to go after Republicans?

    alaskabob in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 11:48 am

    One could have mixed feelings about all those innocent people who signed confession papers during the Stalin Purges. A few refused to the point of death. Do not underestimate the crushing duress that “our” government can illegally inflict on any citizen. What’s to stop them if there are no severe penalties? Nothing so far would give them pause.

    starride in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 11:53 am

    Buck It is obvious you are commenting on a subject that quite frankly you know less about than my 14 year old daughter.

    Flynn plead guilty for the simple reason to prevent the DOJ from driving the buss over his son like they were driving it over Flynn. Flynn spent 5 million dollars in defense of himself. The DOJ and Van Crack broke the law trying to ramrod a conviction where there was no crime. People plead guilty to crimes every day that they are not guilty of simply because the plea is cheaper and more expedient than to fight it. If you cant see this then take your fat A.. concern troll back under the bridge where it belongs.

    I am sorry but I get mad at people that make half a..ed comments and do not put themselves in those same shoes before spouting stupidity., Especially when they don’t understand the simple fact that NO pardon is necessary when the charges were dismissed. The dismissal, especially a dismissal with prejudice MEANS the man was INNOCENT. So take your mixed feelings and figure out what they mean before you spout this level of cr.p.

      buck61 in reply to starride. | May 8, 2020 at 12:40 pm

      since you are lobbing the personal insults, are you Flynn’s attorney or connected to his family? You are making an assumption that he is doing it for that reason. We all know what ass u & me means
      We are in agreement that the government does have the power and resources to bankrupt nearly anyone, morally and financially and in many cases have no regrets in doing so. We are in agreement that the whole thing stinks to high heaven and those involved need to pay a very high price.
      You have no idea what I know and what I don’t know so quit making assumptions and insults, take a look in the mirror, you are the one acting like the child in a comments section.
      What I do know is that we have a very corrupt government at levels and it is sad that a person like Flynn has to be collateral damage in bringing it to light. That light while still dim at this point will hopefully brighten in the very near future.
      Here is a link that you might find an interesting read

        starride in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 2:20 pm

        Lol no, but I can say that I have personally corresponded with Sydney Powel about the Flynn case and have been following this case very closely for over 3 years. By the way Dershowitz was sayin the same thing in 2018 about Flynn, so your posting today was a day late and a dollar short. A little research on your part will go along way.

          buck61 in reply to starride. | May 8, 2020 at 4:03 pm

          Since you claim to have so called insider knowledge of this case how does a person who has worked his way to the top of the nations security ( DIA) over the course of nearly 40 years get himself basically entrapped by a couple of FBI agents on his own turf for doing something that was legal? Why did he hang onto his original legal team for so long when was getting terrible advice from them? While I believe he was clearly framed in this case he also made some questionable decisions over this matter as well.
          Down vote all want.

          starride in reply to starride. | May 8, 2020 at 8:11 pm

          Buck, that is where you are showing your ignorance. This really is one of the most obvious cases of prosecutorial misconduct you will ever hear of.

          First the FBI entered the game with attempting set up Logan act violations against him a law that for one is not prosecutable today because the last time is was prosecuted was in the 18 century, but not a lot of lay people would understand that.

          Then after they entrapped him and doctored the evidence for several months (FBI 302 were basically faked to create a crime) they charged him with lying to the FBI.

          Now to entice a plea they (Mueller team) threatened General Flynn, Flynn Jr and Bijan Kian with FARA violations. Unbeknownst to Flynn, Flynn’s lawyers Covington & Burling were just as culpable in defending the same FARA violations because they were the ones that advised and wrote the filings. Now you must remember that Covington & Burling is a powerhouse firm in DC. AG Holder is now an AA partner in the firm.

          Unbeknownst to Flynn Covington & Burling were being pressured to basically give up their client in return for not being named in the same FARA violations. Covington & Burling basically threw Flynn under train that the bus was riding on. Their conflict was so grave, both the prosecutor and Covington & Burling were under legal obligation to state the conflict and declare that Covington & Burling were unfit to represent Flynn to the court. Instead they tried to cover it up and hide it from the court.

          Now add to the story that the prosecution was under obligation to state in the plea agreement that they offered leniency to Flynn Jr in the FARA case, but instead they tried to conceal it from the court with the help of Covington & Burling. This alone made the case a fraud against the court.

          Things started to fall apart for the prosecution then the FARA case against Bijan Kian completely imploded when the judge put a stop to it saying that the case was insufficient as a matter of law. In fact, the entire FARA case was a smoke screen to pressure Flynn to plead to the lying charges. This is when Mrs. Powell started to get involved. She slowly uncovered how much corruption and misrepresentation had been going on. Truthfully Judge Sullivan should be saying WTF, and pressing charges against every member of the prosecution and Covington & Burling. But unfortunately that wont happen, it will just be swept under the rug.

          Close The Fed in reply to starride. | May 8, 2020 at 11:13 pm

          Buck isn’t paid to be a commenter. If he declines to research, such is a natural thing.

      Close The Fed in reply to starride. | May 8, 2020 at 11:12 pm

      Starride, your tone to a fellow commenter is rude and unjustified.

      I agree Buck may be inexperienced in what motivates plea bargains, but he made his comments in good faith and unobnoxiously.

      He deserves respect.

        starride in reply to Close The Fed. | May 8, 2020 at 11:29 pm

        Respectfully I disagree, His post was obtuse and intending to be derogatory to Flynn all the while trying to convey it from a position of innocent ignorance with a hint of snark.

        He knew exactly what he was saying, it wasn’t nice and it assumed that Flynn was guilty just because he plead.

        He also tried to assert that the potential of being charged with perjury for the guilty plea hung over Flynn’s head without considering the fact that the entire prosecution would be guilty of the same for their lies.

        I just called him out for what he was being, a troll…..

    OwenKellogg-Engineer in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 12:08 pm

    That ship just won’t sail. He plead guilty under pressure of prosecution of his son. Definitely not of his own free will.

      His plea was done to stop the bleeding. Are you aware of just how much Flynn lost, asset-wise, up to the point of the plea? With more losses to come if he didn’t cop the plea. All done with duplicitous legal “help & advice” from his lawyers at Covington & Burling.*

      *Where Eric Holder is an AA “partner.” AA for cerain because as sure as there’s green apples Holder ain’t there because of competence

      Covington & Burling? Yeah, I’ve heard of them. Isn’t that the law firm that’s amount to lose millions because of a set of lawsuits to be filed against them by Michael Flynn?

        Milhouse in reply to pfg. | May 8, 2020 at 3:45 pm

        Don’t be so sure he is an AA case. At a cursory glance his career and achievements seem to speak of actual competence at the law. That he’s black certainly didn’t hurt him, and may well have made things easier for him, but he appears to have succeeded on his own merits. At least that’s my impression.

        That’s perhaps the wost thing about AA: it casts a shadow on any potential recipient, even those who would have done just as well without it.

    DaveGinOly in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 2:02 pm

    Flynn was set up for a process crime at a time there was no longer a predicate for the investigation (field office agents had found no evidence of a crime). That means there was no longer any probable cause to continue the investigation. So if Flynn lied, he lied at a time when the FBI had no credible basis upon which to conduct the questioning. It was a fishing expedition not to find evidence of a crime, but to manufacture a lie with the sole intent of punishing General Flynn for associating with DJT.

      Milhouse in reply to DaveGinOly. | May 8, 2020 at 3:46 pm

      More than that. If there was no legitimate investigation then by definition any lie he told could not have been material to such an investigation, and therefore even if he’d deliberately lied to the agents, knowing full well what they were about, it still wouldn’t have been a crime.

    Lewfarge in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 3:28 pm

    Sorry but you are a fool !
    This was a plea UNDER DURESS and the corrupt prosecutors also intentionally left it out of the court filings and COMMITTED PERJURY by swearing that there were no agreements that were not included in the filings !

      Lewfarge in reply to Lewfarge. | May 8, 2020 at 3:41 pm

      Sorry if I was not clear but the AGREEMENT that I am referring to was the agreement to NOT prosecute Gen. Flynn’s son.

    3manped in reply to buck61. | May 8, 2020 at 5:10 pm

    You must’ve missed the “with prejudice” part.Good bye.

    Terence G. Gain in reply to buck61. | May 9, 2020 at 7:51 am

    Sure buck, just ignore the fact that the guilty plea was coerced.

Deep Plumber continues to illuminate the depths and clear the muck from Obama/Biden/Clinton/JournoLism’s Water Closet.

The statements about what Sally Yates knew and how she felt about those things should be rewritten. Something like the following:

“Sally Yates claimed she knew nothing about the Flynn Frame up until she was in a meeting with co-conspirator Obama. She alleges that she was shocked.”

Otherwise, you’re taking her word for things and that should NEVER happen.

A triple nothing burger with Limburger, onions, and a few pickles. on an open sesame bun.

I’m not seeing the scandal in President Obama knowing details from Flynn’s call.

There wasn’t anything improper with the wiretapping of Flynn’s call with the Russian ambassador, was there? I mean if we’re not tapping the phones of the Russian ambassador, what are we even doing tapping anyone’s phone?

    fast182 in reply to clintack. | May 8, 2020 at 1:07 pm

    FISA means “foreign intelligence surveillance act”. The key word there is FOREIGN. It was designed to protect US Citizens, by “masking” their names, because of constitutional protections against unlawful searches. The names of citizens were only supposed to be revealed in extraordinary circumstances. At the tail end of the Obama administration there was a huge volume of “unmaskings”, many by the UN Ambassador, who normally wouldn’t be in the middle of intelligence matters. Flynn’s call with the Russian was on December 29th, and Obama knew the full details at the January 5th meeting with Yates. It seems to show that that Obama himself was fully involved in the plot, and it wasn’t just a few rogue FBI agents.

    And remember that Obama fired Flynn in 2014, and that Obama was reportedly upset with Flynn’s aggressive opposition to Obama’s prematurely withdraw from Iraq in 2011, warning that it would create a vacuum for ISIS to thrive, which is exactly what happened. I expect that Obama is a petty man who never forgets a slight, especially one that shows him to be wrong on every level.

    Milhouse in reply to clintack. | May 8, 2020 at 3:48 pm

    There was nothing improper in tapping the call. But I can’t think of any legitimate justification for informing the President about it, let alone giving him the contents of the conversation.

      CKYoung in reply to Milhouse. | May 8, 2020 at 8:35 pm

      My reply from the previous (Tara Reade) thread. It’s difficult to determine reply connections on this site, especially on my phone. To your other point, that biden would not necessarily know Spygate or any aspect of it was illegal. biden and his camp tout his decades of experience in office. I also hear biden brag about his law degree and IQ. What the heII is biden doing in a meeting such as this if he didn’t have the acumen to determine what the heII the meeting was about?

      obama: Let’s invite biden to our Spygate meetings.
      staff: But he doesn’t know what the heII is going on.
      obama: No worries, he can sniff sally yates and make friendship bracelets.

      biden can either be a bumbling idiot, unable to grasp simple concepts such as government corruption, or he can be ready to be POTUS, but he sure as heII cant be both.

        Close The Fed in reply to CKYoung. | May 8, 2020 at 11:19 pm

        CK, that’s one reason I usually name who I’m responding to.

        Also, I have found that if I put my cell phone horizontal, the desktop layout appears and I can tell who is replying to whom.

        Hope this helps.

        Milhouse in reply to CKYoung. | May 10, 2020 at 12:28 pm

        CK, I didn’t say he wouldn’t know it’s illegal, I said I haven’t seen anything to indicate he was in on the conspiracy at all. He was present at the meeting where 0bama revealed that he knew about Flynn’s phone call with Kislyak. That doesn’t mean he knew anything about the plan to set him up. That doesn’t seem to have been discussed at that meeting.

    Terence G. Gain in reply to clintack. | May 9, 2020 at 7:48 am


    Open your eyes. Go to Christian Treehouse and listen to Obama try to justify Police State tactics. Here is my take as a Canadian lawyer.


    Obama claims that there is no precedent for someone guilty of perjury getting off scot free. What he does not want the public to understand is that under the rule of law there was no precedent for the FBI to even question Michael Flynn when they knew that he had not committed a crime. As the designated NSA of the incoming President, not only did Flynn have every right to talk to the Russian ambassador Kislyak, he had an obligation to talk to him. The FBI had a tape recording of that conversation and there was no need for them to talk to Flynn. We now have the incriminating note that Obama’s FBI Interviewed Flynn to set a perjury trap and get him fired. The American public needs to know why Barack Obama wanted Flynn fired. What did Michael Flynn know about Barack Obama’s foreign policy that he did not want the public to know.

    Prior to the meeting, Andrew McCabe, the deputy director of the FBI told Flynn that he did not need a lawyer. The FBI then failed to mirandize Flynn despite the fact that he was a target and then coerced a guilty plea out of him when they threatened to prosecute his son. Under these circumstances a DOJ operating under the rule of law has quite properly asked that the charge be dismissed notwithstanding the coerced guilty plea.

    That Barack Obama defends this police state action is very telling. Barack Obama is what you get when a presidential candidate is unvetted and then his presidency is unexamined by the media and a very weak opposition party. 

    Yesterday Andrew McCabe released a statement defending the right of the FBI to question Flynn. It’s as if he thinks the FBI has a supervisory role to play in the conduct of a new president’s foreign policy. It’s as if he thinks Barack Obama was elected POTUS for life. It would be interesting to know what “constitutional scholar” gave him that idea.

So much for the Kenyan’s scandal free administration. As that was ever true.

    bw222 in reply to Romey. | May 8, 2020 at 1:59 pm

    Fast and Furious killed the Kenyan’s scandal-free administration, but the media buried it as quickly as it could.

Morning Sunshine | May 8, 2020 at 12:38 pm

It shocked Yates due to Obama’s “own history with Flynn.” He fired Flynn “as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014” due to insubordination. Flynn claimed Obama fired him over “his aggressive stance on combating Islamic extremism.”

well, based on that, I like Flynn’s stance on combating Islamic extremism…

The proper heads should roll hard for this, but I’ve lost faith in the idea that it’s even possible to serve justice to these elitist jerks who so richly deserve a deep refresher in the whole “behavior-consequence” thing. So I’m sure these a-holes will skate without so much as even a tap on the wrist. Sure sounds “fair” to me.

    fast182 in reply to UJ. | May 8, 2020 at 1:26 pm

    I think Barr honestly wants to get justice, and restore the reputation of the DOJ, but he has to balance that against the massive scope of the corruption. We know that this involves the State Department, CIA, FBI, DOJ, sitting US House Reps and Senators, and maybe even members of the judiciary. Remember that fired-FBI agent Storzk had a personal relationship with Flynn’s first judge, Contreras, and the judge was recused from Flynn’s case when the Strozk-Page texts from July of 2016 revealed that they had discussed how to arrange a casual meeting between the two without raising suspicions.

    So, if you’re Barr, are you really ready to arrest everyone involved, up to and including Obama himself, on a charge of conspiracy to overthrown the US government? That would require a rare level of courage, only seen in a few people in history. We’ll find out if he’s up to the task, or if he’ll just run out the clock and then declare “no criminal intent”.

      fast182 in reply to fast182. | May 8, 2020 at 1:31 pm

      One other problem is that as Durham’s investigation grinds on, we’re getting closer to the November election. At what point will they kick the can down the road to avoid influencing the election? Then if Trump loses, this can all just vanish. It’s a BS excuse, but it’s the easy path to take.

      If Barr and Durham are serious about filing criminal charges against anyone, then it needs to happen soon, by June/July at the latest. If not, then I expect no charges until 2021, and only if Trump is re-elected.

      DaveGinOly in reply to fast182. | May 8, 2020 at 2:12 pm

      “I think Barr honestly wants to get justice, and restore the reputation of the DOJ, but he has to balance that against the massive scope of the corruption.”

      If you were caught embezzling federal funds, do you think Barr would “balance” his duty to prosecute criminals against your interest in not going to prison in order to preserve the stability of your family?

      The only way Barr could possibly “restore the reputation of the DOJ” is to charge and try the lot of them.

        fast182 in reply to DaveGinOly. | May 8, 2020 at 3:43 pm

        Oh I agree completely that Barr must start charging people if we are to save the republic. I’m just acknowledging that it is a monumental task, with a non-zero chance of involuntary suicide, and it’s doubtful that he’s up to the task.

Has Obama skipped the country yet?

I always knew Obama was a bad character. He was what we in the Navy used to call a Blue Falcon. I need to use bad language. BF, as in Buddy Fucker.

I can spot a Blue Falcon from ten miles away.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Arminius. | May 8, 2020 at 2:23 pm

    It’s unfortunate that the blue falcon is not an endangered species.

    Arminius in reply to Arminius. | May 8, 2020 at 7:30 pm

    Those would be nautical miles. Eleven and a half miles to people who don’t do Navy.

    My call sign was “Holy’ if anyone is interested. My last name rhymes with Toledo. I was an intel officer in an F-14 squadron for my first tour. I showed up and told them that was the wrong name. They were like, it’ll still work. So Holy it was. So I was walking around the carrier with the call sign Holy on my flight jacket. And Sailors would approach me to give confession. At first it bothered me. But later I got used to it. I was like, “So, tell me again, what exactly did you do in Thailand?”

    I beat the simulator to death. Never got a hop. One of my squadron mates, LT “Sucker” Cox put an arm around and said, “Holy, we’d love to give you a hop. But you’re not in a paid flight status.” Our flight surgeon was nick named “No Lock Doc.” He let an SU-15 Flagon sneak up on an F-14. I don’t have words for the enormity of that. It’s like a mouse eating a cat. I could work the mighty, mighty AWG-9 like a pro. But if they gave me a hop, they’d have no excuses for refusing to give No Lock Doc a ride.

    I understood. I didn’t like the guy either.

DaveGinOly | May 8, 2020 at 1:26 pm

Add 100. Fire for effect.

The bad news for America is that none of these criminals are in prison yet.

The good news is that somebody with some clout is getting incriminating material like this released, and, even better, released without all the damning stuff redacted.

At this point I do have some faith that the somebody will keep at it.

Unfortunately, because we have a dishonest media, the public won’t become fully aware of this.

It’s only a big deal if the RINO cowards get off their fat asses and DO something about it.

I’ve said it again and again and again.

Why the hell do you think they were all this comfortable and blatant about what they were doing.

Because they expected there to be no meaningful consequences.

And so far they’re 100% right.

Kevin Smith | May 8, 2020 at 2:47 pm

It is clear that the Obama admin holdover FBI and DOJ officials including the Mueller thugs lied to Flynn about the investigation in order to force Flynn to plead guilty to a fake crime that the FBI, DOJ and Mueller fabricated. The Obama admin holdover FBI and DOJ officials lied about the Logan Act being applicable to Flynn, lied about the interview with the FBI being material to any real investigation, lied about the Flynn “lie” impeding an investigation, lied about Flynn son being in trouble about the FARA charge. It is starting to look like it was the Obama admin holdover FBI and DOJ officials including the Mueller thugs who are the real liars and not Flynn.

I believe all if this started with an “honest” search for the truth. There was no “secret society” or meeting in the dead of night. There was no spoken words to indicate conspiracy. In my opinion, this was worse.

This was a group of folks who shared the same political and social ideologies. Obama, Biden, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Rice, Yates, Strozk, Page, Steele, Simpson, Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, Schumer and so on, simply see the GOP as a threat to their world view. In my mind, this isn’t as much about Trump but about defeating by any means possible, anyone that isn’t aligned with the world view they hold.

When evidence was “produced” by Steele via Fusion GPS thanks to payments from the DNC and Clinton campaign that was the “trigger” they needed to say, “see, they are evil and we’ve gotta protect America”. They didn’t meet to get their story straight or to plan the conspiracy, they didn’t have too, all of them were on the same page and believed the same democrat ideals.

What makes this more horrifying to me is that there were no checks and balances to put the breaks on this. There seems to have never been a moment of clarity where anyone of them ask, “can we prove what we believe”? Worse yet is that they purposefully sold their “belief” to the public for years even as they admitted under oath that they had no evidence.

I don’t know if there will be prosecutions or what crimes any if them maybe culpable for but I know their actions have damaged the public trust and worked to destroy the Trump administration. I don’t know exactly how massively corrupt this was but just what I know now makes me wonder if the entire Obama administration was noting but a mafia type organization using the DOJ, FBI, CIA, IRS (remember Lois) to attack and destroy anyone that isn’t in their camp. Hell, maybe the entire eight years was a RICO case that could take generations to unwind. I do hope justice comes and that before election day the American public can see, hear and digest the truth but I’m not holding my breath.

    starride in reply to WillS68. | May 8, 2020 at 3:29 pm

    President Trump and by extension Flynn was their target for the following reasons:
    1. President Trump is the wall standing between them and us. They hate us and everything we stand for so for them to get to us they had to go through him.
    2. President Trump is an outsider to the world of politics. They can not just beat him, to appease their sense of entitlement they have to crush him. They have to hurt him so bad that no outsider will ever try to play in their sand box ever again.
    3. Both Obama and McCabe had vendettas against Flynn. Obama because Flynn stood up to min about the withdrawal of troops in 2014. McCabe because Flynn stood up for a person that filed a sexual harassment complaint.
    4. Flynn was brought in to clean house. They had to get rid of Flynn because he truly knew what was up in DC

    Terence G. Gain in reply to WillS68. | May 9, 2020 at 8:02 am


    Obama was not the least bit interested in a search for the truth. He wanted Flynn removed because Flynn understands the treasonous essence of Obama’s foreign policy.

Flynn is illustrative of the saying: “The process is the punishment”

Shoved deep up obama’a ass is a microphone to george soros’ offices.

Obama is a traitor. It’s now been proven.

    Arminius in reply to | May 8, 2020 at 7:43 pm

    Can you spell Valerie Jarrett and Iran?

    I am so disgusted. This country gave that jerk off two terms. Sorry if I am disappointing anyone. But when I think of all the time I spent, well. Half the time I regret it. The other half, when I can look at my nieces and nephews, I don’t.

I probably already know the answer. I’m weird. I come from a long line of firefighters. My dad who was a Coastie. My Uncle who was a battalion chief in a major west coast fire department. Me in my own small way. Shipboard and wilderness.

I’ve been jonesing for a Pulaski and a USFS shovel.


Without my fire fighting hand tools I feel naked.

Before you think too badly about me.

I was a Coast Guard brat. Which meant my dad got Navy benefits. So I grew up around the horribly burned Sailors and Marines in the Vietnam era.

My one weakness. I’m scared of fire. Actually that’s not just my weakness. It’s why the U.S. Armed Forces developed the flame throwed. It turned out to be the one thing the Japanese would quit over.

Also no. I don’t think any of the tools I mentioned would do me any good on a ship. My cabin in the Sierras, yes.

On a ship a sledge hammer would probably do me better so I could batter down hatches. I don’t know if I could do it but I would give it a trY if that was what it would take to save my shipmates.

No. I’m not special. They would do it for me. I am serious.

I’m not leaving anyone behind.

What I’m even more scared is having to talk to a father or mother and explain why I’m alive and their child isn’t.

Not just foreign policy. Rosenstein needed Sessions to go sit in the corner as to not expose all of the previous crimes like U1. This plan seems to be working for Obama, Clinton, Comey etc. As all of the other crimes are in the rear view mirror.