In the first part of the series that FDL Review published on the investigation and prosecution of Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, there was an excerpt from the FD-302 prepared after the FBI interview with Flynn. This excerpt was regurgitated in part three to postulate that "Flynn played fast and loose with the truth in the interview."
It is important to note that this excerpt is from a document that is now heavily contested, due to modifications by FBI Agent Peter Strzok and his paramour, FBI lawyer Lisa Page. The edits refashioned the perspective of Joe Pientka, the agent who accompanied Strzok at the Flynn interview and took the notes that underpinned the FD-302.
In an article published by the Federalist, Margot Cleveland of the University of Notre Dame notes that we do not have access to the original FD-302 for the Flynn interview, and that the one available was subjected to extensive manipulation. Referencing primary-source documents released by U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, Cleveland reports,
Cleveland editorializes,
The reason for this addendum should be obvious: While the portion of the (modified) FD-302 cited in the FDL Review series is not particularly damning for Flynn, it is becoming more and more clear that the truth is even less damning -- if not exculpatory. It is imperative that the court and the nation have access to the original FD-302 so that we can assess whether Flynn lied, played it "fast and loose" with the truth, or did nothing wrong at all.
It is important to note that this excerpt is from a document that is now heavily contested, due to modifications by FBI Agent Peter Strzok and his paramour, FBI lawyer Lisa Page. The edits refashioned the perspective of Joe Pientka, the agent who accompanied Strzok at the Flynn interview and took the notes that underpinned the FD-302.
 |
| Peter Strzok (Fox News) |
In an article published by the Federalist, Margot Cleveland of the University of Notre Dame notes that we do not have access to the original FD-302 for the Flynn interview, and that the one available was subjected to extensive manipulation. Referencing primary-source documents released by U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, Cleveland reports,
'This document pisses me off,' Page texted Strzok, in reference to the 302 form Strzok had revised and emailed Page. 'You didn’t even attempt to make this cogent and readable,' Page fumed. Strzok countered, 'Lisa you didn’t see it before my edits that went into what I sent you.' He then explained that he was 'trying to not completely re-write the thing so as to save [Pientka’s] voice,' and yet get it to her quickly for a general review. Strzok added that he had already incorporated Page’s earlier edits.
Cleveland editorializes,
What exactly the original 302 said before the edits is important to know. Had FBI Agent Pientka spoken of his belief that Flynn had not knowingly lied in the interview? What exactly did Pientka report Flynn had told him and Strzok about his conversations with the Russian ambassador?
The reason for this addendum should be obvious: While the portion of the (modified) FD-302 cited in the FDL Review series is not particularly damning for Flynn, it is becoming more and more clear that the truth is even less damning -- if not exculpatory. It is imperative that the court and the nation have access to the original FD-302 so that we can assess whether Flynn lied, played it "fast and loose" with the truth, or did nothing wrong at all.
Comments
Post a Comment