Sure, if that helps you grok it.
So if Biden lies to the feds, and his son is a crook, the feds can use that against Joe. You got it.
Nice view.
Correction, he put one of his townhouses on the market. Did he spend more on social media managers or lawyers he fired, anyway?
Did they though? Link.
Oh and lets not forget John Brennan or James Clapper that lied under oath.
Those â â â â â â â scumbags needs to siting in â â â â â â â cell.
3 Likes
Do you know what entails entrapment? You tv lawyers are hilarious
1 Like
What was hunters felony
Thatâs one powerful smirk.
You have your scumbags confused. Itâs Solomon scumbag and patriot Strzok.
So there should be no such thing as perjury as a crime right?..All ya gotta say is "I donât have perfect recallâ
Is any of this factual or is it all opinion?
In general thatâs certainly true, when it comes to politics definitely not.
Hell I voted for Perot, Forbes, and Cruz. I donât trust the RNC any more than I do the DNC.
Try reading what was just released and get back with me. 
You could start here but I doubt you will.
I asked a simple question. Is any of what you posted factual?
You made the claim. You should be able to back it up. At least thatâs what Iâve heard.
âWhen did you stop beating your wife?â
Hey, I just asked⌠.
Itâs not like youâre not completely transparent and predictable.
This seems to be your opinion. Well maybe you got it from Solomon, Jarrett or Powell.
Can you provide a link to the actual text in the 302s to back up this claim?
They already knew he lied and tried to get him to admit it?
Iâm sure you can prove this one, right?
Wasnât it a Republican that decided to interview Flynn?
Strzok even edited the 302âs at least twice as well.
The Evidence
The most significant evidence against the FBI validated in Powellâs brief was the circumstances surrounding Flynnâs first interview with the FBI on Jan. 24, 2017 and the manipulation of the interview report, known as a 302, from that interview. The interview was conducted by now fired FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, whose texts messages later revealed he was vehemently anti-Trump and current FBI Special Agent Joe Pientka, who has never spoken publicly on the matter. In December, 2017 this reporter revealed that it was Strzok who had interviewed Flynn and that the interview itself was a set-up.
Powell noted that âon February 10, 2017, the news brokeâattributed to âsenior intelligence officialsââthat Mr. Flynn had discussed sanctions with Ambassador Kislyak, contrary to what Vice President Pence had said on television previously.â
Then, according to documents, âovernight, the most important substantive changes were made to the Flynn 302.â
âThose changes added an unequivocal statement that âFLYNN stated he did notââin response to whether Mr. Flynn had asked Kislyak to vote in a certain manner or slow down the UN vote. This is a deceptive manipulation because, as the notes of the agents show, Mr. Flynn was not even sure he had spoken to Russia/Kislyak on this issue. He had talked to dozens of countries.â
On Feb. 13, 2017 Flynn resigned as National Security Advisor.
Excerpt from my December, 2017 story:
The former U.S. intelligence official told this reporter, âwith the recent revelation that Strzok was removed from the Special Counsel investigation for making anti-Trump text messages it seems likely that the accuracy and veracity of the 302 of Flynnâs interview as a whole should be reviewed and called into question.â
âThe most logical thing to happen would be to call the other FBI Special Agent present during Flynnâs interview before the Grand Jury to recount his version,â the former intelligence official added.
Start there or like I said, start with the OP and there links.
His statement about meeting with Russians was not accurate, that doesnât make it a like and the agents specifically said they saw no indicators he was intentionally being misleading or deceptive.
Worse, the stuff released in the last 24 hours show they intentionally decieved him with a pre planned setup. If he admitted to having talked to the Russians before Trump took office theyâd charge him under The Logan Act underwhich nobody has ever been prosecuted prior or, if he didnât they would charge him with false statements.
They stated plainly in their discussion notes was to set him up to either get him fired, or to turn him as a witness in the investigation.
Thereâs no other way to read it.
Danggggggggg.
Iâll give you credit. You didnât get your opinions from Solomon, Jarrett or Powell. It was Sara Carter. Well done.
The second time you made this claim. Any direct quote on what they said or wrote in the 302s that support this?
The FBI went to interview a person that had lied to the VP. They knew he lied. They discussed the possible outcomes of their investigation. The FBI does this all the time. It is not entrapment.
Are you saying that we should change the way the FBI operates? They are always trying to turn a suspect.
There is no indictment of all cops here.
This is about a literal handful of bad actors out of an agency of over 35,000 people. This is an indictment of those individuals period along with those who have provided them cover.
Am I supposed to play fetch for you all night when this as been discussed with all the relevant links here for years?
This was not standard Operating Procedure, it was in violation of long standing policy. This was, âhey we just want to drop by for a minuteâ and he was never read his rights or allowed counsel.
Lying to the VP isnât a crime.
If this was anyone else the case would have been tossed in pretrial.
Suspects literally walk on a regular basis for cops doing this.
