Posting again because many anons didn't understand what was meant by the Comey timeline problem. I will attempt to hold your hand through the basic concept, but I really can't start to detail about the implications or problems with Pence (And others like Sean Spicer). I will leave others to dig, I can only spoonfeed so much. Pence is the elephant in the room. The evidence has been staring us in the face the whole time. The Democrats wouldn't want to Jeopardize their Russian collusion narrative, right? Correct. But how many Establishment Republicans like Trump? They kind of hate him, remember? What do you think would happen if a Republican got caught up in the middle of SpyGate? Well, you would expect virtually no scrutiny of someone who is RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF GOD DAMN EVERYTHING from the media, and also the Republicans, who would just want to stay out of the way and cheer for the Democrats from the sidelines. I'll say it again. It's all about Pence. Remove Pence from the Flynn legal issues. Imagine if he just said nothing. Literally, done nothing. What do you get? No Flynn legal issues. PENCE DIRECTLY enabled Sally Yates to headhunt after Flynn and manufacture a crime out of nothing. He gave her the needed pretext. She was there ready to pounce IMMEDIATELY. Pence is as probably in just as deep as Brennan/Comey/Yates/McCabe/Strzok etc. Just with a suspicious lack of coverage and scrutiny of his role.

It is FBI procedure to write the FD-302 within 5 days.

Consensus a week ago:

Jan 24th, 2017- Flynn interviewed by Strzok

Assumed Flynn FD-302 created (Not public).

Aug 22nd, 2017 - Flynn FD-302 was assumed to be based on the original. Perhaps, physically altered by Peter Strzok, or some new composite based on at least the expected Jan 24th Flynn FD-302. There are people involved who were saying that they did not think that Flynn lied at the time. This idea was that this new 302 was somehow changed (after Mueller comes in) in order to force Flynn into a cooperation deal.

Then this happened on Dec 7th, one week ago. Comey testified.

The transcripts were released.

From it we get this.

Mr. Gowdy. Who interviewed General Flynn, which FBI agents?

Mr. Comey. My recollection is two agents, one of whom was Pete Strzok and the other of whom is a career line agent, not a supervisor.

Mr. Gowdy. Did either of those agents, or both, ever tell you that they did not adduce an intent to deceive from their interview with General Flynn?

Mr. Comey. No.

Mr. Gowdy. Have you ever testified differently?

Mr. Comey. No.

Mr. Gowdy. Do you recall being asked that question in aHPSCI hearing?

Mr. Comey. I was asked. No. I recall – I don't remember what question I recall saying the agents observed no indication of deception, physical manifestations, shiftiness, that sort of thing.

Mr. Gowdy. Who would you have gotten that from if you were not present for the interview?

Mr. Comey. From someone at the FBI, who either spoke to – I don't think I spoke to the interviewing agents but got the report from the interviewing agents.

Mr. Gowdy. All right. So you would have, what, read the 302 or had a conversation with someone who read the 302?

Mr. Comey. I don't remember for sure. I think I may have done both, that is, read the 302 and then spoke to people who had spoken to the investigators themselves directly. It's possible I just don't remember that.

So what do we get from that? Well, Comey just notified us that he FOR SURE knows about the content of a Flynn FD-302. This is clear cut confirmation that there is indeed a Flynn FD-302 that was created shortly after Flynn's Jan 24th FBI interview, as per FBI rules.

Then we had the Flynn's legal team's sentencing memo just the other day. This is where we learned something new. This shatters the previous consensus, which was already pretty terrible. The August 22nd Flynn FD-302 that is referenced in the new court documents was NOT what was assumed before. It is a NEW FD-302. This was created by FBI agents following an interview they conducted. That interview was of Strzok (Or possibly the other agent with him), and the subject was the handling of their investigation/questioning of Flynn.

So, this means a whole lot.

1. There was a Flynn FD-302 based on the Jan 24th,2017 interview.

2. Comey was Fully aware. He was in charge.

3. Judge asked for 302's. Explicitly. No wiggle room.

4. SC gives over Aug 22nd 302.

5. This is a 302 of an interview by the FBI of the people who created the original 302.

6. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude there is no longer an original January Flynn FD-302.

It's not that anyone changed any document after the fact to make it appear as if anyone lied. It's worse. That document doesn't even exist.

source

https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-transcript-james-comeys-dec-7-interview-house-committees

>>4320688

Wow, it's like the shilling stopped all of a sudden for some reason. Maybe i'll post more later.

>>4321038

Maybe. It's likely that the 1st Flynn 302 was destroyed.

Refer to Page/Strozk communications.

Come September 10, 2016, two and a half weeks from when then FBI director Comey would testify before the House Judiciary Committee, Strzok was starting to get concerned about what he had withheld from lawmakers. In particular, there were agent summaries of interviews with witnesses that had been requested, but were never provided to the hill: “thing is, there are VERY inflammatory things in the 302s we didn’t turn over to Congress (because they weren’t relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation) that are going to come out in FOIA and absolutely inflame Congress…”