Mueller’s response to Judge Sullivan is…interesting
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, who is overseeing Michael Flynn’s case, demanded that the Special Counsel [Mueller] submit copies of FBI 302 reports from Flynn’s January 24th FBI interview as well as then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s memorandum from that day…
Judge Sullivan had set a deadline of 3 pm Friday which Mueller met. He included a cover letter warning the judge not to “minimize” the seriousness of the charges against Flynn. Missing from the documents was the original and crucial FBI 302 report. FBI rules require that a 302 report be prepared within five days of an interview. Instead, Fox News reports that the 302 submitted to Judge Sullivan was dated July 19, 2017 and “specifically came from an interview with Strzok in which the Flynn encounter was discussed — and not the original Flynn interview.” Worse still, this report was heavily redacted. One and a half pages were completely redacted.
The FBI’s treatment of Flynn—and its stonewalling about revealing what actually occurred, as well as its possible destruction or at least hiding of relevant documents—would be shocking if we hadn’t grown accustomed to such outrageous actions by what people have come to call the Deep State (otherwise known as unelected government officials). It’s still outrageous and wrong, but not shocking.
Law professor Jonathan Turley had this to say about it in an interview with Tucker Carlson:
…[Turley] said the case against Flynn was a “canned hunt” and investigators effectively “put him in a cage and shot him” by bringing him up on charges of lying during an interview brought about under unorthodox means.
Even if Flynn is ultimately exonerated, the intended damage to him and to the Trump administration has been done. That damage is not just to Flynn or even to Trump, however, it’s to the rule of law and to the feeling of trust much of America used to have in our own government.
Mueller is just jerking this judge around. Taunting him. If I were the judge, I’d call Bob into chambers on Monday and find out where the original 302 is. The one that was prepared right after the interview.
The judge needs to go on the offense here. He needs to personally question these clowns. If he doesn’t like their answers, then a show cause hearing for contempt.
Some one has to apply the Rule of Law to King Mueller.
Lesson one for every lawyer: You don’t lie to or jerk around a judge; especially a federal judge.
This judge is not one to accept such jerking around. First, he is black and a Clinton appointee,. so there is that. Second, he unloaded on Obama’s DOJ in the Ted Stevens case.
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, speaking in a slow and deliberate manner that failed to conceal his anger, said that in 25 years on the bench, he had “never seen mishandling and misconduct like what I have seen” by the Justice Department prosecutors who tried the Stevens case.
Judge Sullivan’s lacerating 14-minute speech, focusing on disclosures that prosecutors had improperly withheld evidence in the case, virtually guaranteed reverberations beyond the morning’s dismissal of the verdict that helped end Mr. Stevens’s Senate career.
The judge, who was named to the Federal District Court here by President Bill Clinton, delivered a broad warning about what he said was a “troubling tendency” he had observed among prosecutors to stretch the boundaries of ethics restrictions and conceal evidence to win cases. He named Henry F. Schuelke 3rd, a prominent Washington lawyer, to investigate six career Justice Department prosecutors, including the chief and deputy chief of the Public Integrity Section, an elite unit charged with dealing with official corruption, to see if they should face criminal charges.
I would love to see him unload on Mueller.
Folks better not be surprised when yellow vests start showing up at Mueller’s house…or in other places where the swamp denizens dwell.
It’s not going to be pretty…and somebody’s liable to get hurt.
Did he?
Obama took office on January 20, 2009. Stevens was indicted on July 29, 2008, and found guilty on October 27, 2008.
In April 2009, Obama’s AG, Eric Holder, took the extraordinary step of asking Judge Sullivan to void Steven’s conviction.
True, the scamming prosecutors in question were career employees. The Obama administration was implicated after the fact to some degree, when the prosecutors in question received only token punishments. The legal profession doesn’t self-police at all. In a just world, they’d have been fired, disbarred, and relieved of their home equity.
They’re not playing hide the ball because showing the ball would work in their favor. I guess they figure the IRS got away with it so why not them. And what’s Christopher Wray’s excuse here? If Mueller’s stonewalling, no reason for the FBI to stonewall at this point (bar that Wray appears to see his job as minimizing the degree to which FBI employees are held accountable for malfeasance, misfeasance, and nonfeasance).
Mike K:
The judge was appointed to his federal position by Clinton, but he was originally a Reagan and then Bush appointee.
Will be curious to see how the NYT/WAPO et al. ignore / misreport / spin this.
Put it on page 1002? Section X10? Hide it on the weddings and engagements page? The weather page? The personals? (Do the personals still exist?)
(Gosh, if they don’t write anything about it, maybe it’ll just blow over….)
Most likely, they’ll shift into warp speed attacking and slashing at anyone and everyone who dares impugn Mueller (et al.) or who engages in any “behavior” or reportage that might be interpreted as somehow helping the Anti-Christ in the WH.
E.g., This attack on NPR:
https://twitter.com/Mimirocah1/status/1073930503458353152
Saw Turley on a recent Tucker Carlson segment on the Flynn case, and Turley cynically laughed and rolled his eyes, as he opined that Flynn’s problem was largely his own fault, for naively trusting people in snake pit D.C., and not having a lawyer present to protect Flynn’s (and WH) interests.
I suspect that Flynn might have been a lot more used to dealing with military personnel, who were not–as a rule–the dishonorable weasels that we’ve discovered that many government employees are in D.C.
The judge was appointed to his federal position by Clinton, but he was originally a Reagan and then Bush appointee.
My point was that he is pretty much immune to the usual leftist slanders based on his race and relationship with Clinton.
As to Turley’s comment, I think the FBI went to some trouble to mislead Flynn and should pay a big price. Obama hated Flynn because he had emphasized Islamic terrorism when Obama did not want it mentioned. McCabe hated Flynn because Flynn had backed a female agent who had accused McCabe of harassment.
The story.
The FBI launched a criminal probe against former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn two years after the retired Army general roiled the bureau’s leadership by intervening on behalf of a decorated counterterrorism agent who accused now-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other top officials of sexual discrimination, according to documents and interviews.
Flynn’s intervention on behalf of Supervisory Special Agent Robyn Gritz was highly unusual, and included a letter in 2014 on his official Pentagon stationary, a public interview in 2015 supporting Gritz’s case and an offer to testify on her behalf. His offer put him as a hostile witness in a case against McCabe, who was soaring through the bureau’s leadership ranks.
The FBI sought to block Flynn’s support for the agent, asking a federal administrative law judge in May 2014 to keep Flynn and others from becoming a witness in her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) case, memos obtained by Circa show. Two years later, the FBI opened its inquiry of Flynn.
Both Obama and the FBI, especially McCabe, had it in for Flynn.
while not all Germans are nazis, Herr Müller fulfills all the negative stereotypes. the scariest thing is that he has been goose stepping like an Obergruppenfuhrer his entire career and he und Veißmannn have never been fired, disbarred or prosecuted. I wonder how many of his family served as Einsatzgruppen or Kommandants in Death Camps?
Andy McCarthy, who I usually trust is wrong.
For now, the question is: Did Flynn lie? The answer appears to be, yes, he did.
Where are the 302s, Andy ? I think there is a lot of evidence of lying by the FBI.
And some wonder why so many on the Right are angry. And have no trust in a good number of Government organizations.
If the FBI and Mueller cannot or will not produce the original 302 and related notes, Flynn’s conviction should be thrown out, and then Mueller should be thrown out.
To quote Levrentiy Beria, Head of Stalin’s Secret Police, “Show me the man, and
I’ll find you the crime,” i.e. point out the guy you want to take down, and I’ll find something to pin on him.
The FBI’s interview of Flynn reportedly took place just four days after Trump was inaugurated, and as the new Administration was just starting to get up to speed, to get organized and staffed.
Comey has bragged on TV that he was pretty sure that the new–at this point not yet unorganized and chaotic Trump Administration–would likely be vulnerable to the kind of set-up he was planning on springing on Gen. Flynn.
So, Comey and McCabe deliberately gave way too naive and honorable Gen. Flynn the impression that such a visit by FBI Agents Srzok and Pientka was routine, informal, of no real importance, and specifically told Flynn that “Flynn didn’t need to involve a WH lawyer in the visit because if was just too much of a hassle.”
The two agents were also instructed not to give away the game by warning Flynn that if he lied to them, he could be subject to prosecution.
As I wrote on this site in the last couple of days, you have to understand the constant, 24/7 hurricane, the massive amount of information–coming in from all sorts of sources–and the very large numbers of discussions, meetings, e-mails, and telephone calls Flynn was probably in the middle of, a party to.
That Flynn might not have remembered whether, in one of his conversations with Russian Ambassador Kisliyak, they discussed the specific subject of sanctions on Russia, seems very plausible to me.
The Agents had the transcripts, they knew what was and wasn’t discussed in any conversation Flynn had had with Kisliyak, and they asked Gen. Flynn–I’m sure in a very chatty, low key way–if he had discussed sanctions with Kisliyak, and when he said “no”–I wonder if Flynn actually said something like “he didn’t think so,” or that “he couldn’t remember talking with Kisliyak about them, or “he couldn’t remember talking about sanctions in a particular conversation with Kisliyak”–and they had him.
I note former FBI Director Comey’s recent testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, in which he answered that he “didn’t recall,” “didn’t remember,” or “didn’t know” 245 times to the 250 questions posed to him.
I also wonder if Gen. Flynn might also have hesitated to reveal if he had talked about sanctions on Russia with the Russian Ambassador to two FBI Agents who he probably didn’t know from Adam, who probably didn’t have a “need to know,” or likely high enough clearances to be privy to that specific national security information.
I assume that had the FBI Agents directly asked Flynn that question he would have realized that something was up, and called in a WH lawyer.
But, my bet is that the Agents posed that question as Gen. was walking the Agents through the WH during their “White House tour,” asked the question in a very casual, off-hand, nonchalant way.
I’m surprised no one has brought up the fact that Flynn was General Stanley McChrystal’s right-hand man back when McChrystal was doing an excellent job prosecuting the Surge. Flynn knows where an awful lot of bodies are buried. Joe Biden, for one, hates him forever, and Biden had more power under Obama than is generally, publicly, known.
I’ve always found it interesting that the two most successful generals of the Iraq War were both forced to resign in dubious circumstances. There is a lot that remains unexamined in each case. Flynn, incidentally, is the one who told the writer from Rolling Stone, “If you fuck us over, we’ll kill you.” This was in the reporter’s book. And after his 2009 hit-piece on McChrystal appeared, eliminating McChrystal, the reporter indeed ended up dead a few months later, in a fiery car accident in L.A. I talked to my friend at ABC about it, but he didn’t want to go down that road.
In other words, quickly, without elaboration: Michael Flynn is an interesting character.
Mike K — Bo Gritz was a famous Special Forces officer from the Vietnam era. After he retired, he was involved with all sorts of strange events, cults, and people, including running for President on the Populist Party ticket. I wonder if former Supervisory Special Agent Robyn Gritz is related to him and that’s how LTG Flynn knew her and why he went to bat for her.
I remember Bo Gritz. He tried to talk Randy Weaver into surrendering and may have succeeded. Interesting the name connection.
Here is her letter to the judge supporting Flynn.
I looked up Gritz’s bio and he has four children but could not find their names.,
the reporter indeed ended up dead a few months later, in a fiery car accident in L.A. I talked to my friend at ABC about it, but he didn’t want to go down that road.
I don’t think Gen. McChrystal Jedi-mind tricked him into late night reckless driving in LA. Aping Paul (“Fast & Furious”) Walker, the guy ploughed his Benz into a tree at high speed. Sorry to be brutal, but you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.
I looked up Gritz’s bio and he has four children but could not find their names.,
He had two children by his his first wife, Tan Muoi Tu (“Carrie Sue”). The children would have been born some time during the years running from 1968 to 1974. They evidently cared for a third youth, who was born in 1959 or thereabouts. Presumably the child of one or the other, but perhaps some other relation or a foster child. He married Claudia King in November 1974, and appears to still be married to her. Noodling around in several databases produce some names which might be sons, daughters, or daughters-in-law: ‘James Gordon Gritz, Jr.’, ‘James Roy Gritz’, ‘Judy Gale Gritz’, ‘Vicci L. Gritz’, ‘Lisa Gritz’. No Robyns. Some of his kids are pushing 50, so it might be a granddaughter. Noodling around, I locate two women in the United States named ‘Robyn Gritz’, one born in 1969 and another born in 1959. From their residence history, neither appear to have any connection to Col. Bo Gritz.
“Lying” to the FBI is not “lying” as normal humans use the verb.
“Lying” to the FBI includes honest mistakes, forgetting when they think you should have remembered, or saying something different from what they heard from someone else.
What’s happening to Trump is classic Alinsky “Rules For Radicals” inspired: Isolate him. Swamp him with investigations of his entire life. Should have done that with Barack Hussein Obama, but no, the rules and rulers are on a one-way street.
I think very little of the failure of loyalty by so many appointed to high office by Trump. They are clearly bailing, not standing with him- Nikki Haley is a clear example.
This entire ‘investigation’ process is obscene, disgusting, vile, and illegitimate.
Nikki Haley is a clear example.
I agree about loyalty but I’m not sure she is an example. Not yet, anyway.
One reason his kids are so involved is that he can trust almost no one.
The idea that NPR is running stories favorable to Trump is laughable on its face. I have to listen to one or two hours of it every morning, and the pattern is clear: lead off every newscast with the Trump scandal of the moment (lately “Cohen says…”) making sure to conflate accusations of criminality with proven criminality (“illegal payment to help the campaign”). Also add perjorative language right into headlines (“Trump claimed falsely that…”). Never mention mitigating facts such as the definition of a campaign contribution, or previous FEC rulings, or Obama campaign violation that dwarf the alleged Trump ones. Finally, make sure to work subjective statements (“the walls are closing in on the President”) presenting them as factual analysis. The bottom line is that NPR reporting on Trump is disgraceful.
On rare occasions when a commentator dares to interject a cautionary note, the left goes crazy… nothing but absolute 100% alignment with the Democrat talking points will be permitted!
Ps. The tongue-bath given the defunct Weekly Standard this morning was truly nauseating, with the hostess flatly stating that the demise of the “fact-based” WS left the conservative news scene dominated by “opinion-driven” outlets! My God, the hypocrisy!
Not listened to NPR in 15 years. The News Hour consists of partisan framing all the way down. It was ruined by Jim Lehrer’s retirement.
McCarthy, after assuring us that Flynn lied, now wonders where the 302 is.
To my eye, the situation is even more disturbing than the press reporting suggests. It appears that there is no 302 of the Flynn interview. The 302 dated August 22, 2017, which Mueller submitted to the court, documents an interview of Peter Strzok, not of Flynn. It appears that this interview of Strzok took place on July 19, notes of the interview were drafted the next day (July 20), and the 302 was approved and entered into the FBI’s files on August 22. The question obviously arises: Where is the Flynn 302? FBI procedures would have called for a report within a few days of the interview. It is not that there wasn’t one for seven months. For now, it looks like none has been produced at all.
Better late than never but McCarthy seems to be finally realizing his buddies in the Mueller operation are lying.
The image that comes to mind to describe what we are discovering about many parts of our government–at the moment the DOJ and FBI the most prominent among them–is perhaps discovering, to our shock and surprise, that a tree we thought was and appeared to be healthy and sound is, in fact, rotten to it’s core, hollow–crawling inside with parasitic insects, their remains, their excrement, and dust–with only its deceptive outside shell remaining.
The rest of the story on the corrupt DOJ in the Ted Stevens case.
The judge then commissioned a 525-page report that presented withering evidence of DoJ misconduct. Irrefutable evidence of prosecutorial misconduct prompted the DoJ to assign Terrence Berg, an attorney in the DoJ’s Professional Misconduct Review Unit, to recommend a penalty for two trial attorneys (James Goeke and Joseph Bottini.)
Berg was the bureaucracy’s first of two interventions on behalf of railroading prosecutors. Berg stalled for several months while he “studied” the evidence and finally concluded that the prosecutors had done nothing wrong. The agency then assigned the matter to the unit chief, who concluded that a 45-day suspension would be warranted.
If you were a partisan DoJ attorney bent on meddling in future elections, would the risk of a 45-day suspension be enough to deter you? The attorneys appealed the 45-day suspensions, arguing they should be entitled to the benefit of Berg’s early assessment that they did nothing wrong. Then the bureaucracy intervened again to save the railroading prosecutors.
The Merit Systems Protection Board granted their appeal, ruling that even though both prosecutors might be guilty of the misconduct as-charged, that they had the right to Berg’s original assessment. And that’s how two DoJ prosecutors got away with railroading Stevens and swinging an election for the U.S. Senate.
And apologies to manju. The DOJ that convicted Stevens was a Bush DOJ. The DOJ that covered it up and exonerated the prosecutors was Obama’s.
That’s why we call it the :”Uniparty.”
Again, in a just world Goeke and Bottini would have been dismissed, disbarred, and prosecuted. In effect, we have total immunity for prosecutors and judges. We need to start punishing them.
Well, someone is certainly on the ball:
https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1073990705759092736
And little by little, darkness visible through the fog and mirrors….:
https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1073669003791323136
AKA “curiouser and curiouser”…
Of course “there’s nothing to see here folks…”(TM).
(Though one might be moved to begin to think of the coming avalanche as—oh, let’s call it—a Democratic Chernobyl…, which, as everyone well knows, was simply a dastardly anti-soviet plot….)
Frederick on December 16, 2018 at 11:22 am at 11:22 am said:
“Lying” to the FBI is not “lying” as normal humans use the verb.
“Lying” to the FBI includes honest mistakes, forgetting when they think you should have remembered, or saying something different from what they heard from someone else.
Art Deco on December 16, 2018 at 3:58 pm at 3:58 pm said:
Again, in a just world Goeke and Bottini would have been dismissed, disbarred, and prosecuted. In effect, we have total immunity for prosecutors and judges. We need to start punishing them.
***
We need to add ALL government employees and officials to the list, if they are found by legal trial to have been lying and obstructing justice.
Sauce for the goose….
Fine ’em, then fire ’em.
Disbar any to whom that applies; pull all security clearances; and ban them from further government service for life.
Flynn was apparently pretty stupid, in that he talked to the police without an attorney present.
Under NO circumstances whatsoever should you speak to the police (or anyone in the LEO or Justice fields) without an attorney present. No matter WHAT.
Not if you “haven’t done anything”
Not if you “are completely innocent”
NEVER.
Here’s the reason for it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
Another related observation is, NEVER invite cops into your house. Don’t argue if they insist, but never volunteer. If they want to speak to you, step outside.
Think of it like this: Cops are like vampires. It’s harder for them to hurt you if you don’t invite them in.
It sound cynical, but — cops are not on your side. They have an agenda. And very little concern for your interests if you are needed to further that agenda.
Flynn was apparently pretty stupid, in that he talked to the police without an attorney present.
I wouldn’t call it”stupid” but he was far too trusting. They made a point to convince him not to have a lawyer, the White House Counsel, present. It was a set up but he was just not paranoid enough. Hillary would never make that mistake. If she did, those two FBI agents would be found dead.
A couple of interesting posts on the Flynn-Mueller thing.
Strzok was kept around to recreate that 302.
According to the Inspector General report, Lisa Page was removed from the special counsel on July 15th, 2017 but her lover Peter Strzok wasn’t removed from the special counsel until “late July.”
The FBI still had to provide cover and button up a bit before they removed Peter Strzok so they kept him on just a little longer so they could get a 302 report on record about the Flynn ambush interview that took place several months prior.
The FB I interview of Flynn followed the Mafia pattern.
I quote him from memory: “When it’s your time to go, they’ll send your best friend to do the job. He’ll come to you as a pal, get you all relaxed. Maybe drink with you, joke around, and then, while you’re laughing and having a good time and all — BAM! — lights out! You’ll never see it coming.”
He knew what he was talking about. In fact, that was the script for any number of mob murders that I investigated. The victim’s killer always came to him as a friend.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the FBI guys went to Flynn on a premise of discussing some national security issue, liaison with the FBI, or some such. If that is so, I don’t see how the charge of “Lying to the FBI” can even stand. For example, if I list a car for sale, and and an FBI agent calls me and asks, is this a good car?” and I say, “I haven’t had any problems with it,” and he buys the car and I forgot that I had a CV boot replaced, can I be charged with lying to the FBI?
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/12/the-flynn-302.php
I’d kind of like to know why FBI agents were asking questions about foreign policy. Why is that any of their business?
302s, 302s.
I’ve written here before about the lecture I attended in which a retired TWA pilot with over 40 years experience asserted–and offered what I thought was pretty convincing proof–that TWA 800 was shot down by a missile (either launched by a bunch of terrorists, or by our own Navy by mistake), and how the FBI/CIA made very strenuous and comprehensive efforts to cover this up.
In the context of the 302s in the Flynn case, here is an article discussing how the FBI altered or manufactured some phony witness 302s, highlighted a witness or two, and ignored what hundreds of others saw that didn’t fit the “narrative” they wanted to establish as the truth, in the TWA 800 investigation.
See https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/12/the_fbi_manufactured_302s_before_mueller.html
When you think about it, so much of our system of Justice really depends on the people involved having morals, a code of conduct, some honor, playing by the rules, doing things by the book.
Our system is set up on the assumption that honorable people are doing honorable things, are trying to be fair and aboveboard.
That’s why our justice system is so vulnerable, and easy to game by dishonorable people who have bad intentions and a nefarious agenda.
Judge Sullivan is apparently one of the old school, principled judges.
You have to wonder, though–as the Left has infiltrated, subverted, and has control over just about every aspect, in every sphere of our lives and nation, occupies all the high points of power, influence, and control–if there are enough old school, principled government officials and judges still standing for anything like Justice to still prevail, in this or in any other case or instance.
I’ve written here before about the lecture I attended in which a retired TWA pilot with over 40 years experience asserted–and offered what I thought was pretty convincing proof–that TWA 800 was shot down by a missile (either launched by a bunch of terrorists, or by our own Navy by mistake), and how the FBI/CIA made very strenuous and comprehensive efforts to cover this up.
They’d have had to suborn engineers working for the National Transportation Safety Board to accomplish that. Not buying.
I’m afraid I misjudged Judge Sullivan who seems to have reverted to deep state loyalty.
The Clinton-appointed judge, Emmett Sullivan, claimed that Flynn’s suggestion that the FBI misled him (which it, you know, did) cast doubt on Flynn’s acceptance of culpability. The not-so-veiled threat from the judge is that if Flynn wouldn’t repudiate his previous complaints about the FBI, he’d toss out the plea deal and sentence Flynn more harshly than the plea called for.
He also badgered both Flynn and the prosecutor about whether Flynn had committed “treason.”
Though then, after he returned from a break, this Clinton appointee said he wanted to “clarify” that his own previous claim that Flynn was working in the White House when his contacts with foreigners occurred. I guess he bothered to read the actual facts and corrected himself — well, “clarified” — that Flynn wasn’t in the White House and that he was now not “suggesting” treason.
Which is actually exactly what he did before.
Basically the judge seems to be threatening Flynn with jail time unless he offers more to the Mueller investigation. Flynn has gotten that message, and now says he wants to delay sentencing because he might cooperate more with Mueller.
The court has delayed sentencing to permit this. So, no sentencing today. After threatening Flynn for an hour, Flynn got the message and said he would cooperate more.
Here comes the composing since he didn’t have anything to sing about. Too bad. I had hopes with this judge.
They’d have had to suborn engineers working for the National Transportation Safety Board to accomplish that. Not buying.
I wish I could be as confident.
Two contrasting stories about the Flynn hearing today.
WaPo is ecstatic and even CNBC has one version of the story.
The sentencing of Michael Flynn was postponed Tuesday after the judge told the former national security advisor “arguably you sold your country out” — and warned the fallen Army lieutenant general that he might be sent to jail if he did not agree to delay the hearing.
Apparently, the judge thought that Flynn was working for Turkey when he was in government, then took a short recess and came back saying he had been wrong.
Now, Rush Limbaugh is saying the judge was tough on Mueller’s group.
Catherine Herridge has more on this.
Sullivan later clarified that his question about treason was out of curiosity, not an accusation.
I still don’t know what the hell is going on.
At Deco–The pilot, who had flown the very plane that crashed a few days before the fatal crash, and was the Airline Pilot’s Association’s rep on this investigation, said that he was at the scene and at the reconstruction hanger, as part of the Investigation, on day two, had interacted with all the key government officials involved, and that, from the get go, the FBI–on orders from higher authority–showed up and took charge of the investigation, muscling the much more qualified NTSB investigators out of doing the actual investigation.
From what he observed, the NTSB investigators were basically relegated to the status of observers.
What he/they witnessed was FBI, and later CIA agents, doing things like cleaning vitally important telltale residue off exterior parts of the reconstructed aircraft, moving pieces of that reconstructed aircraft, and relabeling them as to position.
It also appeared that some of the pieces of that reconstructed aircraft would simply disappear over night.
The pilot also recounted how a couple of suspicious NTSB investigators managed to get a small, couple of square inch piece of fabric from one of TWA800’s seats out of the building for independent testing, and how the government came down on them like a ton of bricks, charging them with “theft of government property.”
As I recall, he said that, while NTSB management eventually signed off on the conclusions of the investigation, those officials who signed off on the report did so for political reasons.
At Deco–The pilot, who had flown the very plane that crashed a few days before the fatal crash, and was the Airline Pilot’s Association’s rep on this investigation, said that he was at the scene and at the reconstruction hanger, as part of the Investigation, on day two, had interacted with all the key government officials involved, and that, from the get go, the FBI–on orders from higher authority–showed up and took charge of the investigation, muscling the much more qualified NTSB investigators out of doing the actual investigation.
Not buying. Where are you going to find in the FBI the hyper-skilled personnel to do this sort of investigation?
And, here’s the report, issued not by the FBI, but by the NTSB:
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AAR0003.aspx
What he/they witnessed was FBI, and later CIA agents, doing things like cleaning vitally important telltale residue off exterior parts of the reconstructed aircraft, moving pieces of that reconstructed aircraft, and relabeling them as to position.
How did you verify this man wasn’t an imposter?
Art Deco–
The lecturer who gave the presentation I heard was getting up there in age, and I believe he was named Capt. James Speer.
Here is Speer’s resume, and an affidavit he made about what he saw going on in the investigation that bothered him. See http://twa800.com/lahr/affidavits/l-james-speer.pdf
Below is a much younger James Speer, on a video, identified as being with the Airline Pilot’s Association, speaking about some of the things he saw during the “investigation” of TWA800 that made him believe that it was a coverup.
See the Speer video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqgQ6cZi9jw
Art Deco.–My mistake.
Well, I just got the catalog a few minutes ago, and that lecture about TWA800 is going to be given again in our area, and the picture of the lecturer in our catalog–the guy who gave the lecture I previously attended–is identified as retired former TWA Captain Al Francis, not James Speer, as I had thought.
The funny thing is, though, that both Speer–as seen in the video and the affidavit I cited above–and Francis, are saying the same things, citing what appear to be the same concerning incidents and actions.