Why is Lying to the FBI a Crime When the FBI Lies to Us?

“INTELLIGENCE” AGENCY COMPROMISED OVER LACK OF ACTION ON OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE, ELIGIBILITY

by Sharon Rondeau

The FBI is a subsidiary of the U.S. Department of Justice

(Dec. 15, 2018) — Former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos recently spent 12 days in federal prison after pleading “guilty” to lying to the FBI during interviews last year about any contacts he may have had with Russians during the 2016 election cycle.

On December 1, 2017, Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn (Ret) pleaded “guilty” to one count of lying to the FBI about his conversations with then-Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak during the presidential transition period.

Lying to “federal agents” is a crime under 18 U.S.C. 1001.

Although the FBI admitted to purposely interviewing Flynn without an attorney present or issuing a warning about lying, Flynn is due to be sentenced on Tuesday.  “Before the interview, [then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew] McCabe, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and others decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport,” a paragraph from the FBI’s “302” report reads.

The agency was then led by James B. Comey, who was fired on May 9, 2017.  In a shocking display of deceit, hubris and verbosity despite his inability to recall basic details of the “Russia” investigation to members of Congress days before, Comey admitted to MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace in a lengthy interview that dispatching FBI agents to interview a White House official without the presence of an administration attorney or issuing a warning that lying to agents was a crime was “something I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more … organized administration.”

Despite its claim that its agents train at “the world’s premier law enforcement learning and research center and an advocate for law enforcement’s best practices,” it allowed a forgery bearing the name “Barack Hussein Obama II” to not only be uploaded, but also to remain on the White House website in perpetuity “with the intent to deceive.”

Comey himself deceived Donald Trump when he told him that he was not under investigation by the FBI.  Comey has also admitted to “leaking” his FBI memos to the media, some of which likely contained classified information, with the purpose of spurring the hiring of a “special counsel” to investigate alleged Trump-Russia “collusion,” a probe which has cost the American taxpayer more than $25 million to date.  However, before Comey was fired in May 2017, he testified to the House Intelligence Committee that “Leaks of classified information are serious, serious federal crimes for a reason” and “should be investigated and where possible prosecuted in a way that reflects that seriousness so that people understand it simply cannot be tolerated.”

Comey also signed off on what he said was a “salacious and unverified” dossier written by unidentified sources submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to secure surveillance warrants on then-Trump adviser Carter Page.

The agents visiting Flynn, now-terminated agent Peter Strzok and Joe Pientka, who Comey said he “sent” without going through the White House counsel’s office, spoke with Flynn four days into the new administration.  Some believe that the Trump administration has been the target of not only a myriad of national-security leaks, but also, unprecedented sabotage.

Flynn waived the right to an attorney during the interview, The Washington Post‘s Greg Miller claimed in a recently-published book titled, “The Apprentice,” in stark contrast to that which the FBI’s “302” report and Flynn’s attorneys say.  Neither Miller, his colleagues nor the FBI has publicly questioned how transcripts of Flynn’s calls were released to “a handful of officials in Washington” prior to Donald Trump’s inauguration as the result of an obvious national-security leak.

Can the conduct we have seen, then, be a surprise given that Barack Hussein Obama — or whatever his name is — chose him for his FBI director after the equally-compromised and corrupt Robert Mueller’s term, extended by Congress by two years, ended in 2013?  Did Comey not preside over an agency which covered up the largest crime in American political history:  presenting a known birth certificate forgery to the American people to convince them Obama was legitimate?

During Mueller’s term, the New Haven, CT FBI office falsely told a resident of that state that there was no question about Obama’s eligibility because of his claimed birth in Hawaii.  “You do realize that since he was born in Hawaii that makes him a U.S. citizen no matter what nationality his father was at the time,” someone claiming to be an agent wrote in a 2009 email in response to a criminal complaint. “He was born in 1961, 2 yrs after Hawaii was made the 50th state in the country. There is nothing illegal about his presidency, he has not utilized 30 different social security numbers either.”

The agent’s assertions are contradicted by recent reports from the lead investigator in a five-year probe of the birth certificate image, Mike Zullo, who has stated that it has been “an open secret” in Washington, DC that Obama was not born on U.S. soil.  Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president and commander-in-chief of the military to be a “natural born Citizen.”

FBI agents are apparently not intelligent enough to know that eventually, the truth would come out, as it is now.  The claim by the two agents who interviewed Flynn that he appeared “bright, but not very sophisticated” is laughable when Strzok, the former second-in-command in the FBI’s counterintelligence unit, collected his paycheck without questioning the legitimacy of a man who numerous mainstream reports had already reported as “born in Kenya” or “born in Indonesia” before surreptitiously altering their stories.

And then there was the FBI media representative, reached after we were transferred and/or put on hold five times, who admitted to having watched the entire July 17, 2012 presser in which Zullo reported that the standard of probable cause in the forgery of the birth certificate was overcome by investigators yet advised us to simply “contact our congressman” if we believed a crime had been committed.

After then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio reported to the Selective Service System (SSS) that investigators found Obama’s purported registration form to be fraudulent and asked to see a certified copy of the original, the agency’s response was, “This Agency has no evidence that President Obama’s 1980 registration is not authentic. However, if you have any credible evidence to the contrary and believe that a Federal crime has been committed, we suggest that it be turned over immediately to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to pursue.”

In 2014, while Obama was still in the White House, the FBI established an “Intelligence Branch” designed to “lead intelligence integration and to ensure the FBI’s intelligence role is broader than simply the national security mission.”  Yet, although Arpaio called the Obama forgeries a pressing issue of “national security,” the FBI did nothing.

Without one agent standing up to the unconstitutional “President Obama” during his eight years of usurpation of the presidency or after he left office with the clear intent to bring down his constitutionally-qualified successor, the FBI shows its lack of honesty, integrity and “intelligence.”

 

 

 

3 Responses to "Why is Lying to the FBI a Crime When the FBI Lies to Us?"

  1. Mark Bellison   Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 3:47 PM

    You probably won’t print this but how do you know the FBI has no looked into this?

    They don’t need to contact Zullo as they have their own digital document examiners, image analysts, even typewriter experts. And remember they would have access to documents that Zullo would not.

    Isn’t it possible, they examined the PDF, Savannah Guthrie photographs, AP photo and yes, even the original certified copy of the birth certificate and arrived at different conclusions than Reed Hayes and ForLabs?

    There is a reason we know for an absolute fact the typewriter used for birth certificates in Hawaii in 1961 was an Underwood.

  2. gbear   Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 12:42 PM

    Should I ever have to be interviewed by the FBI, I will have caught HillComey disease: “I don’t remember, I don’t recall.”

  3. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 11:03 AM

    https://youtu.be/ko-qFqmKsYQ

    ARREST OBAMA, RELEASE AMERICA

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.