Thread by @ClimateAudit

Flynn told McCabe prior to meeting that McCabe "probably knew what had been said". Then redaction. What is purpose and authority for redaction? Was Flynn referring to wiretap? Regardless, if he believed that McCabe "probably knew", why would he "lie"? Makes no sense.

2/ another questionable redaction. McCabe and redacted others conspired to not warn Flynn. Who are the redacted others? Redacted others are almost certainly major officials not entitled to be hidden.

3/ Strzok 302 in August recalls that Flynn only "hedged once" - which they documented in the 302. Presumably the actual 302 which they appear to have concealed from Judge Sullivan.

4/ Strzok returned and briefed McCabe. Various people redacted, including presumably Sally Yates.

5/ Mueller asserted that Flynn "made materially false statements in filings" under FARA on March 7, 2017, but didnt identify. What were they?

In Papadopoulos' Sentencing Memorandum, Mueller made false statements so Mueller assertions to court need to be viewed very skeptically.

6/ Flynn's FARA registration here efile.fara.gov/docs/6406-Regi…. In Sep 2016, Flynn had already registered his representation of Inovo, a foreign private corporation, under Lobbying Registration Act. It wasn't as tho this was hidden.

7/ Covington and Burley, a leading firm on FARA and Flynn counsel, state that "agent of foreign private sector principal [can] satisfy any FARA obligation by registering under the LDA, so long as the agent has engaged in at least some lobbying activities"
cov.com/-/media/files/…

8/ Covington, in FARA filing on behalf of Flynn Intel Group, said FIG "concluded that because its client was a foreign corporation and the services provided included lobbying activities, it could file under the LDA". The same exemption described above
cov.com/-/media/files/…

9/ Flynn had been retained by Inovo, but its actual interests turned out to "focus on Mr. Fethullah Gulen, whose extradition is sought by the Government of Turkey". Flynn thus ex post filed FARA stating that "engagement could be construed to have principally benefitted" Turkey.

10/ Flynn's FARA filing also disclosed that they planned to commission a video from a public relations firm, but that this project did not take place.

11/ in Mueller's sentencing memorandum (before Reply), Mueller said that Flynn's FARA filing omitted material fact that Turkish "officials" had supervised his project
online.wsj.com/public/resourc…?

12/ Mueller said that Flynn's FARA filing falsely represented that op ed "was written at his own initiative", as opposed to as part of his representation.

13/ contrary to Mueller's claim that Flynn had concealed interest of Turkish government in Fethullah Gulen in his FARA filing, Flynn specifically mentioned Gulen in his filing letter, citing this as very reason why they decided to file under FARA as well as LRA.

14/ hmmm. Flynn wrote a Nov 8, 2016 pro-Turkey op ed thehill.com/blogs/pundits-…. FARA filing implausibly said of op eds: "Although not undertaken at the direction of any foreign principal, including but not limited to Inovo" efile.fara.gov/docs/6406-Regi…

15/ here is link to original filing under Lobbying Registration Act
soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?even…

16/ Mueller's sentencing submission gives the following link efile.fara.gov/docs/6406-Regi… for Flynn's FARA filing. However, simultaneously, Flynn filed extensive supplementary details efile.fara.gov/docs/6406-Supp… which were not linked by Mueller.

17/ FARA supplement states that Flynn "understood engagement to be focused on improving U.S. business organizations' confidence regarding doing business in Turkey" and that Inovo's counsel represented that "no part of fees paid..by Inovo was provided by any foreign government"

18/ in Statement of Offense, Mueller twisted Flynn's statement of his original (August 2016) understanding of the purpose of the contract, into a seemingly categorical lie. Actual filing doesn't say what Mueller claimed. Exactly same deception by Mueller in Papadopoulos pleadings

19/ Flynn FARA filing continues, saying that they conducted open source research on Gulen.

20/ although Mueller stated that FARA filing "concealed" contacts with Turkish officials, the FARA filing disclosed a meeting between Flynn and Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Energy on Sep 19, 2016.

21/ in respect to op ed, Flynn stated "not written or published at the request of, or under the direction or control of, Inovo, the Republic of Turkey", though "a draft of the op-ed was shared with Inovo in advance of publication".

22/ Mueller says that Flynn's claim that "an op-ed by FLYNN published in The Hill on November 8, 2016, was written at his own initiative" was a lie.

23/ in the various parsing of McCabe's cajoling of Flynn not to involve counsel in his meeting with FBI agents, nobody (least of all Comey and McCabe) seems to have paid attention to formal FBI policies on contact with represented persons (which Flynn was and which DOJ knew)

24/ The Attorney General's Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations
vault.fbi.gov/FBI%20Domestic…
and the FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guidelines
vault.fbi.gov/FBI%20Domestic… both regulate contact with represented persons

25/ The Attorney General Guidelines AAG-DOM, V(B)(1) states that "FBI will follow applicable law and Department procedure concerning contact with represented individuals in absence of prior notice to counsel".

26/ FBI Domestic Investigations &Operations Guidelines (DIOG) states "CDC [Chief Division Counsel] review is required before contact with represented person". OGC (Office of General Counsel) - James Baker - would also suffice. Baker review required to follow law and procedure.

27/ when Comey and McCabe decided to take advantage of still-organizing Trump administration by sending two agents against Flynn, a represented person, did they carry out required review by FBI counsel? Seems unlikely given haste of operation.

28/ from near-contemporary documents, there is unequivocal evidence that DOJ knew that Flynn was represented.

29/ on November 30, 2016 (according to Chuck Ross, Daily Caller
dailycaller.com/2017/03/31/her…), DOJ had contacted Flynn about his representation of Inovo and Turkey.

30/ on January 11, 2017 (same Daily Caller article), "Flynn's lawyers responded to the Justice Department" and notified them that Flynn would "probably register under FARA".

31/ Daily Caller received the above information from a "read-out" of a DOJ spreadsheet dated Jan 27, 2017 - only three days after Flynn was ambushed without counsel on Jan 24, 2017. On Jan 24, 2017, the day of Flynn's ambush, the DOJ unequivocally knew that Flynn was represented

32/ separately, Attorney General Guidelines (page 9) notes that FBI foreign intelligence gathering may include information concerning "lawful activities" e.g. Flynn contact with Kislyak. FBI then required to "operate openly and consensually with U.S. persons". Comey disregarded.

33/ FBI DIOG Guidelines also require FBI to "operate openly and consensually with a U.S. person to the extent practicable". Conspiracy by Comey, McCabe and others to trick Flynn was obvious breach.

34/ remember Comey's purported obtuseness about FBI policies and procedures. In Flynn case, it appears that Comey was personally directing the intelligence operation against Flynn. But did Comey even know procedures that agents required to follow? Or was his role too ethereal?

35/ Comey's personal direction of agents sent against Flynn is surely highly unusual for FBI director. How many rules and regulations did he break? Quite aside from unseemliness of renegade FBI director trying to "get away" with operation instead of aiding new administration.

36/ in addition to issues arising from sending agents against represented person, did Comey and McCabe observe FBI regulations for a "sensitive investigative matter" - an investigative matter involving activities of a "domestic public official". (Issues also apply to campaign).

37/ "Sensitive investigative matters" require "special approval and reporting".

38/ for "sensitive" matters, DIOG 10.4 requires "prior [Chief Division Counsel] review". Wonder what review was carried out by OGC James Baker? Also requires "written notice" to DOJ National Security Division. Wonder what these documents look like.