I wonder what the excuse for that is. Jeff Danik, a former FBI SAC, said FBI policy "is that the notes must be placed in the system in a 1-A file within five days of the interview” and “anything beyond five business days is a problem, eight months is a disaster.”
The Flynn Entrapment
- Thread starter Poindexter
- Start date
Everything with the right is a conspiracy.
What about Benghazi? It might be time to get that one going again.
Flynn never should have plead quilty. He should have fallen back on the ole 5-day 1-A file rule. 
Okay, just so that we don't get lost in the weeds, let's focus on this little section just for a minute- BECAUSE YOU CAN BET YOUR ARSE THE JUDGE WILL HAVE QUESTIONS.
302's of course are the agents summary reports after doing witness/defendant interviews, etc.
It has been reported that it is the normal standard required practice for agents to complete their 302's within 2-4 days after the interview unless they are on the road, in court, or some reasonable excuse.
Texts between Strzok and Page refer to the 302's for Flynn just a few days after Flynn's interview- obviously suggesting/confirming that the 302's for Flynn were in fact done by then. There would have been at least one by Strzok who was the lead interviewer and then possibly others depending on whether the person in attendance actually interviewed or just sat in on it.).HOWEVER, when the court or flynn's attorney requested copies of the 302, the copy showed that the report was dated SEVEN MONTHS (I have also read five) after the interview date. So the $64,000 question that will come up is whether the report was amended after the original was done, who did it, and why. To amend an original 302 to make it conform with some future need to convict someone, or exonerate them is a big, big, big, no-no legally.
I know I got into the weeds a bit there but just sayin, if sometime next week you hear a big shhplattttt, that would be the judge shiiting his pants.
MORE TO COME.
Last edited:
What about "Russia, Russia, Russia" and obstruction?
Except that Mueller's own investigators concluded that Flynn had not intentionally lied. And then when Mueller was not able to get Flynn on anything related to the Ruskies he went back and charged him with perjury anyway just to squeeze him more for something on Trump. Where is the agent and his 302 which states that he thought Flynn had intentionally mislead them or lied?
Nevermind. The judge will look at that for me. Not sayin that your view does not matter, but not sayin it does either.
Oh, and did I mention that someone apparently altered or found a need to put a new date on the original 302 seven months later?
Or the alternative facts would be that Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI and agreed to cooperate and spill those Russian Beans, so there was nothing left to charge Fynn on with regard to "the Ruskies". That may be what happens when you have a cooperating witness! "You never know, Blanche."
You've got some real important dirt here. Have you thought about starting a podcast on YouTube. You'll have 30 million subscribers in no time.