Volume 1, 193. He lied three times. Why didnt you charge him with a crime . I cant get into internal deliberations as to what or would not be you charged a lot of people from making false statements. Lets remember this. In 2016 the fbi did something they probably havent done before. They spied on two american citizens associated with the president ial campaign. George papadopoulos and carter page. Was carter page who then went to the g the fisa court. With mr. Papadopoulos they didnt go to the court. They used human sources. From about the moment papadopoulos joins the Trump Campaign you have all of these people All Around The World starting to swirl around him. Names like halper, downer, misfeud, thompson. Meeting in rome, london, all
kinds of places and the fbi even sent a lady posing as somebody else. Went by the name turk to spy on papadopoulos. In one of the meetings he is talking to a foreign diplomat and he says that the russians have dirt on clinton. That Diplomat Contacts the
joseph misfeud. he told papadopoulos and the mysterious professor who lives in rome and london, works at two different universities. he told papadopoulos he s the guy who starts it all. and when the fbi interviews him, he lies three times and yet you don t charge him with a crime. you charge rick gates for false statements. charge paul manafort and charge michael cohen and michael flynn a three-star general with false statements but the guy who puts the country through the whole saga starts it off for three years we have lived this now. he lies and you guys don t charge him. i m curious as to why. well, i can t get into it and it s obvious i think we can t get into charging decisions. when the fbi interviewed him in february, when the special counsel s office interviewed misfeud did he lie to you too? i can t get into that. did you interview him? i can t get into it.
alleged obstruction and then you failed to apply the elements of the applicable statutes. i looked at the ten factual situations and i read the case law and i have to tell you just looking at the flynn matter for example the four statutes that you cited for possible obstruction when i look at those concerning the flynn matter, 1503 is it wasn t a grand jury or a trial jury impanelled and director comey was not an officer of the court as defined by the statute. section 1505 criminalizes acts that would have obstructed or impeded administrative proceedings before congress or the administrative agency. the department of justice manual states that it s not a pending investigation. 1512-b talks about force and tampering with a witness. general flynn at the time was
the i had served two terms as fbi director. the answer is no. the answer is no. greg jarrett describes your office as the team of partisans. as additional information is coming to light, there s a growing concern that political bias caused important facts to be omitted from your report in order to cast the president unfairly, in a negative light. for example, john dowd, the president s lawyer, leaves a message with michael flynn s lawyer on november 2017. the edited version in your report makes it appear he was improperly asking for confidential information. that s all we know from your report, except that the judge in the flynn case ordered the entire transcript released in which dowd makes it crystal clear that s not what he was suggesting. so my question is why did you edit the transcript to hide the exculpatory part of the message? i don t agree with your characterization that we did anything to hide. well, you omitted it.