WSJ Explores The Mystery Of Michael Flynn's Guilty Plea

In recent months, The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board has not been shy of criticizing the establishment as much as the rest of the media-moonscape criticizes Trump. Having jabbed at "too conflicted" Mueller, urging him to step down, and daring to point out that it was Trump who started the trade wars, but China; the authors turned their angry gaze at the mystery of Former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn's guilty plea... especially considering FBI agents said he did not commit a crime...

Via The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board,

One of the stranger moments of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe is Michael Flynn’s Dec. 1, 2017 guilty plea for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The former White House national security adviser pleaded guilty to a single count of making false statements, even though then FBI director James Comey had told Congress in March that the two FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn believed he hadn’t lied.

These columns reported this Comey testimony based on sources at the time of Mr. Flynn’s plea (“The Flynn Information,” Dec. 1, 2017). Now comes confirmation from a less redacted version of the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia report released late Friday.

On pages 53-54, the report notes that in March 2017 “Director Comey testified to the Committee that ‘the agents . . . discerned no physical indications of deception. They didn’t see any change in posture, in tone, in inflection, in eye contact. They saw nothing that indicated to them that he knew he was lying to them.’” The quotes are from the committee transcript of Mr. Comey’s remarks.

The report goes on to say that then Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe “confirmed the interviewing agent’s initial impression and stated that the ‘conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements that he made in the interview . . . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.’

Recall that the inconsistency concerned whether Mr. Flynn had discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Vice President Mike Pence had said publicly that Mr. Flynn had not discussed sanctions, and once it came to light that he had, Mr. Flynn resigned.

But Mr. McCabe also nonetheless told the House Intelligence Committee that “‘the two people who interviewed [Flynn] didn’t think he was lying, [which] was not [a] great beginning of a false statement case.’”

All of this relates to the mystery of why Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty to making false statements. It made little sense for him to lie since as a seasoned intelligence officer he would know the U.S. eavesdrops on the Russian ambassador. He also willingly sat for the FBI interview with no legal counsel, suggesting he felt no risk in doing so.

Certainly the statements about the FBI agent’s impression of Mr. Flynn would not have helped Mr. Mueller’s case at trial had Mr. Flynn not pleaded guilty. The plea deal noted that Mr. Flynn’s sentence would depend on his “assistance in the investigation,” and perhaps Mr. Flynn felt he lacked the money to defend himself in court. He also may have wanted to spare his son, whom Mr. Mueller was also targeting.

In any case it is a dubious practice for a prosecutor to force a cooperating witness to plead guilty to a crime he didn’t commit. Perhaps Mr. Flynn is supplying testimony behind the scenes that puts all of this in a better light, but the facts on the public record to date don’t reflect well on Mr. Mueller’s prosecutorial tactics toward Mr. Flynn.

The House report also reflects poorly on Mr. Comey’s credibility.

Despite the transcript of his testimony, Mr. Comey at least three times on his book tour has denied telling Congress that the FBI agents did not think Mr. Flynn was lying.

“Did you tell lawmakers that FBI agents didn’t believe former national security adviser Michael Flynn was lying intentionally to investigators?” Fox News’ Bret Baier asked Mr. Comey on April 26.

“No,” Mr. Comey replied, adding that “I didn’t believe that and didn’t say that.”

Asked a similar question by NBC’s Chuck Todd, Mr. Comey responded, “Not true. And I don’t know what people heard me say, if they’re reporting it accurately, what they heard me say, they misunderstood. But that’s not accurate.”

Perhaps Mr. Comey’s memory is faulty, as happens with human beings, though then he might commiserate with Mr. Flynn. On the other hand, Mr. Comey has jailed many Americans for false statements to the FBI, with no accommodation for mistakes of memory.

The latest House release also shows again the games that the Department of Justice and FBI are playing with redactions. The FBI has for weeks fought Intelligence Committee requests to declassify this portion of its report, though the only harm from public knowledge is to Mr. Comey’s reputation and to the credibility of Mr. Mueller’s prosecution.

The FBI has a conflict of interest in overseeing redactions given that the behavior of its leaders and agents are in question. This is one more reason for President Trump to use his authority to declassify all of the Russia 2016 files.

Tags

Comments

pc_babe Mon, 05/07/2018 - 13:20 Permalink

A Man of Incredible Moral Fiber ... God Bless You, Flynn!

I cant wait to see them flip Comey ... will he turn on chocolate jesus, lynch, holder, clapper, rice, powers and brennan for a reduced sentence?

East Indian asteroids Mon, 05/07/2018 - 21:47 Permalink

The FBI did not "interview" him; it essentially ambushed him; walking into the office of a senior member of the Executive without notice (they told him one officer is coming; but another tagged along); not telling him his rights; twisting a simple statement into a "lie"; ignoring the fact that a member of the incoming cabinet is not committing treason by talking to a foreign emissary...

After serving 33 years with the MIC, if he lacks money to defend himself properly from false charges, it shows his honesty all these years.

In reply to by asteroids

blindfaith Kayman Mon, 05/07/2018 - 17:33 Permalink

 

 

The DNC...  CAN NOT just drop the law suit...legally.  The other party must agree to it FIRST, and state that to the Judge

 

Flynn did what he did because of his son...the schmuck Muller was after any groin hair he could put his filthy (JEW) hands on.  This is the first time in my life that I am feeling the Jews in government are a cause to bring down this Republic and their own kind are silent. God will remember.  And, the Democrats will pay in November for it too.  The only Democrats I know that are still stupid as a stump are the CNN watchers, and the rest have bailed the party.  Me Included.

In reply to by Kayman

boattrash chunga Mon, 05/07/2018 - 14:16 Permalink

I can't explain the costs incurred by trying to stand against FedGov in court, but the ranchers/Bundy/Finicum Families (and many others) sure as hell can.

Then there is a southern gentleman named Franklin Sanders (a metals dealer) that articulated the costs in a brief story called "The Most Dangerous Man In the Mid-South" based on his battles with Feds. I can't stress the importance of people comprehending this. Link and excerpt below. https://the-moneychanger.com/answers/the_most_dangerous_man_in_the_mid_…

I didn't sally forth looking for dragons to slay. The dragon came to me. He came with a lie, and either you oppose a lie, or you become a liar. You can kid yourself and say I'm only going along because they have all the guns, but day by day, year by year, your integrity erodes. Finally, you become like the tyrants: just one more liar.

Even if you have no chance to win, you have to fight. Not many are willing, but even a few keep the tyrants from sleeping at night. If we don't fight, how many more Ruby Ridges and Wacos will there be? How many more SWAT team attacks? How many more police check points? How many more bureaucrats watching your bank account and your finances? How many more children held hostage by IRS agents? The bill of rights is already dead. Will it be time to fight when your wife and children are dead, too?

The US government spent millions of dollars trying to jail me and my wife and my pastor and assistant pastor. The assistant US attorney here told one lawyer that I was "the most dangerous man in the mid-South." In a four and a half year investigation the government spent $5-$10 million, maybe more. We heard they spent nearly two million on the trial alone.

We can't both be right. Either the government is right and gold and silver coin is not money, or I am right. This is not a gentlemen's "difference of opinion."

 

In reply to by chunga

chunga boattrash Mon, 05/07/2018 - 14:30 Permalink

What a sucky way to have to live though, to have to fight evil rotten monsters that are supposed to be "public servants". What made me think of it was the Hammonds, who actually seemed as though they *wanted* to go back to prison, and my thought was they had been threatened so bad they were happy about it.

One more time, here is the link to "American Standoff". 90 minutes of pure solid evil visited upon the Hammonds, the Bundys, and Robert LaVoy Finicum by the US gov.

This is required viewing and should be mandatory in every school in the land.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6GAoqvK5s0

If the maverick wanted to see regular people converge on DC with pitchforks, he'd do well to tweet this out and leave it embedded front and center of the WH web site.

In reply to by boattrash

seek chunga Mon, 05/07/2018 - 14:29 Permalink

I remember it as well.

FWIW, the theory that's floated by those following Qanon is that Flynn's move was part of a great plan to allow him to work outside the WH (thus protecting it) and also implicate more deep staters.

This past weekend there was a significant shift in the Qanon presentation with the suggestion that things are about to get a lot more public and active. Time will tell if this is a very sophisticated LARPer or if we're about to see some big dominoes fall.

In reply to by chunga

seek Herd Redirecti… Mon, 05/07/2018 - 16:08 Permalink

My guess would be to establish credibility for all the claims, once everything has been accepted as true leading up to it, the news would likely be accepted. Same reason that they appear to be going after the political crimes first rather than the pizzagate stuff -- some of the news is so sick and insane and the top people won't believe it until there's no other choice, if you start with that it's going to be dismissed.

In reply to by Herd Redirecti…

Thought Processor Yog Soggoth Mon, 05/07/2018 - 17:58 Permalink

 

Pedogate is essentially today's MK Ultra but I think it's the Deep State's MK Ultra and not only the CIA / Mossad or MI6.  

Follow the sponsorship funds / money back to it's source and the real power involved (families who own and control much more than is ever publicized).   It's a very small club that is, and has historically been, both beyond reach and legally untouchable. 

In reply to by Yog Soggoth

Omen IV NugginFuts Mon, 05/07/2018 - 13:39 Permalink

why didnt his lawyer regardless of his plea ask for the DOJ files he was entitled to?

weird

along with why did Sessions appoint Rosenstein?

along with why did Rosenstein & Sessions appoint Wray?

along with why is Wray covering for multiple people via the redactions -  which will come out anyway sooner or later?

is this all a strategy to push for delays until less than 2 weeks before the election and something explodes?

In reply to by NugginFuts

JRobby Omen IV Mon, 05/07/2018 - 13:58 Permalink

Desperate for impeachment they are.

Here's the platform: "vote for us, we'll impeach"

Without any idea of how many voters would actually vote for "them" to do so. The pale faced, screaming at the sky, black masked terrotists are a small minority that the TV would have you believe is much larger. It isn't.

That's pretty fucking desperate.

The thing they miss is that voters want their GOVERNMENT TO ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING, LEGISLATE SOMETHING.

Not throw a 2 year temper tantrum because their (deeply flawed and ill) candidate didn't win.

In reply to by Omen IV

rockstone JRobby Mon, 05/07/2018 - 14:20 Permalink

A deeply flawed candidate did win. None of us can speak to the condition of his health, we simply don’t know. I’ll tell you this, odds are, it’s hasn't gotten better. That may be part of the plan too. Keep punching and wear him down. 

Maybe, a better and less flawed nominee could had either avoided this completely or, at the very least, snuffed it out a lot sooner. 

Trumptards were warned. Elect him, get a clusterfuck you can’t win. And there’s no wall and no Ocare repeal. And she still isn’t “locked up”.

In reply to by JRobby

rockstone 11b40 Mon, 05/07/2018 - 17:54 Permalink

And he was the only guy who could beat her right? Wrong. A dozen fucking people were at the first R debate and he undressed you like you were a prom queen. You had some real mutts up there but you also had a few people who could do the job too.

But you got smart (see) and  went with the game show host (who does not have a billion dollars, c’mon man) with the porn stars. What could go wrong!!??

Nice work. Way to fucking go! And you’ve won what exactly? A DACA repeal? Lol........

In reply to by 11b40

11b40 rockstone Mon, 05/07/2018 - 18:15 Permalink

Who?  A stage full of losers and D.C. creeps, all eager to cozy up to the swamp creatures.  Did you want another Bush?  How about the G-S golden boy Cruz?  Come on.  Tell us which horse you were betting on.  Which one would have rammed through the tax cuts?  Which one would have pushed Rocket Man right into a corner?  Which one would be bringing the FBI out of the shadows and into the light?

You sound like just another sore loser, but, I see you have your CNN/MSNBC story line down......let's talk porn stars!

In reply to by rockstone

Kayman Omen IV Mon, 05/07/2018 - 14:41 Permalink

How many lawyers want their doors knocked down, all their papers read, while waiting for some judge to say the FBI wasn't legally entitled to knock down their doors.

If Mueller, the DOJ, the FBI, and the other cockroach agencies get away with this Trump coup, we will have full-on, no recourse Police State. 

 

In reply to by Omen IV

Kayman GreatUncle Mon, 05/07/2018 - 14:44 Permalink

Prosecutors have the endless pockets of the State, and unchecked Authority, with ZERO consequences.

Only billionaires could afford to defend themselves, even multi-millionaires like Conrad Black were bankrupted.

And there are no consequences whatsoever, when Prosecutors deliberately hide exculpatory evidence.

In reply to by GreatUncle

robobbob NugginFuts Mon, 05/07/2018 - 16:00 Permalink

Or maybe Flynn is a stand up guy trying to save his family

"Today, I can’t possibly pay the attendant legal costs and live near my aging father, raising my kids where I grew up,” Caputo said. “Your investigation and others into the allegations of Trump campaign collusion with Russia are costing my family a great deal of money — more than $125,000 — and making a visceral impact on my children." 

Michael Caputo told the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday, "God damn you to hell,"

 

Falling on your sword is a time honored traditional to try and avoid financial disaster for your family.

In reply to by NugginFuts

lester1 pc_babe Mon, 05/07/2018 - 13:27 Permalink

Clearly Flynn was blackmailed by Mueller and corrupt FBI agents into pleading guilty. Im thinking they threatened to file some manufactured charges against his son. The FBI have been known to blackmail people into pleading guilty to crimes they didn't commit.

 

I also wouldn't be surprised to see corrupt FBI agents colluding with the mainstream liberal media!

​​​​​

​​​​​​

In reply to by pc_babe