The Federalist’s Sean Davis has done a little research into unclassified documents related to the Michael Flynn investigation and found something very odd about what is and isn’t redacted.
Must read thread. https://t.co/NXZQCOoeR7
— Kim Priestap (@kimpriestap) May 5, 2018
Thread—> https://t.co/Zu07gRZbOJ
— Rich Weinstein (@phillyrich1) May 5, 2018
This is some interesting, not to mention maddening, stuff. Read it for yourself:
The most recent unclassified version of the House Intel Committee's report exposes how DOJ and FBI improperly use redactions to protect people like James Comey from public scrutiny. The before/after versions show what dirty pool DOJ/FBI were playing. Examples forthcoming…
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 4, 2018
Compare the fully redacted version that came out last week to the mostly unredacted version that came out today. Do you see what DOJ/FBI tried to cover up? McCabe said they hadn't substantiated anything against Flynn, and the ambush of Flynn at the WH was directed by Comey. pic.twitter.com/6Fc9U3kVwM
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 4, 2018
Compare these two pages. The initial redacted version hid clear testimony that the FBI didn't think Flynn lied. McCabe: "The two people who interviewed [Flynn] didn't think he was lying[.]" And: "[N]ot [a] great beginning of a false statement case[.]" pic.twitter.com/MZNIHCGzPU
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 4, 2018
DOJ/FBI also tried to hide Comey's clear testimony that FBI agents didn't think Flynn lied. Here's what they covered up: "Comey testified to the Committee that 'the agents…discerned no physical indications of deception. They saw nothing that indicated…he was lying to them.'" pic.twitter.com/bEUiinjxlQ
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 4, 2018
Now compare those statements under oath from Comey with what he told @BretBaier on television last week. It's extremely difficult to reconcile them. pic.twitter.com/UZqj07rMpp
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 4, 2018
It’s clear that DOJ/FBI demanded significant redactions not to protect national security or sources/methods, but to protect potentially corrupt officials from accountability for their actions before and after Trump’s election.
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 5, 2018
The Flynn redactions appear to have been done to protect a false statements case with no evidentiary basis. Others were done to hide apparent conspiracy to spy on and leak against Trump officials out of spite over the election results.
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 5, 2018
In one section, initially redacted material suggests an investigation against Flynn that, per Comey, should have been closed was kept open because he may have *thwarted* Obama admin plans to provoke Russia into disproportionately attxkinf the U.S.
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 5, 2018
With that context in mind, additional redacted material suggests that the illegal leaks against Flynn were done entirely to justify continuing an investigation against him that the FBI had already determined was without basis. This is not how the rule of law works.
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 5, 2018
Ouch! Stay tuned.
