Posted on 02/12/2018 4:36:48 PM PST by mojito
In March 2017, then-FBI Director James Comey briefed a number of Capitol Hill lawmakers on the Trump-Russia investigation. One topic of intense interest was the case of Michael Flynn, the Trump White House national security adviser who resigned under pressure on February 13 after just 24 days in the job.
[....]
...Lawmakers wanted Comey to tell them what was up. And what they heard from the director did not match what they were hearing in the media.
According to two sources familiar with the meetings, Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional. As a result, some of those in attendance came away with the impression that Flynn would not be charged with a crime pertaining to the January 24 interview.
Nine months later, with Comey gone and special counsel Robert Mueller in charge of the Trump-Russia investigation, Flynn pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the FBI in that January 24 questioning.
What happened? With Flynn awaiting sentencing that was recently delayed until at least May some lawmakers are trying to figure out what occurred between the time Comey told Congress the FBI did not believe Flynn lied and the time, several months later, when Flynn pleaded guilty to just that.
None of those congressional investigators has an answer; they're baffled by the turn of events. But they know they find the Flynn case troubling, from start to finish.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Bob Mueller is a dirty cop.
James Comey is a dirty cop.
It’s all collapsing right on top of the sob’s.
This is looking like a sleazy vendetta cooked up by Sally Yates and the other 0bamazoid’s that staff Mueller's investigation.
I suspect Flynn’s sentencing was delayed because everyone knows the information flooding out from the House and Senate intelligence committees is going to give him plenty of grounds to withdraw his guilty plea.
McCabe told those that interviewed Flynn to change their notes of the interview of Flynn to make it look like Flynn was lying. Mueller had to know what was going on and yet still charge Flynn
I wonder whether, ironically, it may have been Strzok that was the holdout against prosecuting Flynn for lying to the FBI. Strzok participated in the questioning of Flynn by the FBI.
I seem to recall reading that before becoming a special agent Strzok had been an Army officer and had posts in military intelligence.
Maybe Strzok was unwilling to gin up a contrived prosecution against someone like Flynn who had devoted his adult life to serving our country and who had also been in military intelligence.
Strzok and his girlfriend were removed from Mueller’s assignment in June or July of last year, supposedly for bias.
But that explanation never made sense, since pretty much the entire Mueller team is made up of rabid partisans biased against Trump.
I wonder whether he was removed from the investigation because he was an obstacle to going after Flynn.
What happened is Flynn was close to bankrupt from defending himself and his son and he just wanted it to stop
I have seen this allegation but I have not seen this in any official document. But this narrative would explain the following series of events:
1. The Nunes/HPSCI memo is sent to the White House for review.
2. FBI Director Christopher Wray meets with Nunes over the weekend before it was released.
3. McCabe's resignation/termination is announced on the Monday morning immediately after the Wray-Nunes meeting.
4. Within 1-2 days after that, Mueller and Flynn's legal counsel as the court to postpone Flynn's sentencing hearing for 3+ months.
There's no mention of McCabe instructing FBI agents to change their notes in the HPSCI/Nunes memo, but if Wray met with Nunes over that weekend then he probably heard a lot of things from Nunes that aren't in the memo.
It was delayed because the new judge assigned to the case has demanded that Muellers team provide him for his review any information that they may have which may prove to be exculpatory for Flynn.
By most accounts, this was an unusual request for the judge to make in these circumstances.
That was a court order signed on December 12, 2017 (I believe).
By most accounts, this was an unusual request for the judge to make in these circumstances.
It seemed unusual to me, but lawyers may offer a different view of it. Someone described it here on FR as a formality that is typical in cases where a period of time is expected to elapse between the date the guilty plea is entered and the date of sentencing.
In any case, it would seem that any information related to the conduct of the FBI in the "Russia collusion" investigation that comes out of the Nunes memo or the IG report would absolutely be relevant to the Flynn case.
They framed Flynn.
The goal is to bankrupt him and ruin his reputation, not to convict him of anything.
They were going to have the witch hunt against Trump whether Comey was fired or not. Comey discussed the investigation with Trump while he was still FBI Director.
If he wants to cut Flynn slack it's most likely because Flynn has dirt on him, not because of any higher values.
When Flynn was thrown under the bus, it all started. When they exonerate him, it will all quit.
Isn’t the judge in the Flynn case the same one who as a member of the FISA court authorized all the malfeasance? I think Flynn gets out of this without prison. I don’t know where he goes to get his reputation back.
Yeah, they delayed all that about the same day the Nunes memo came out.
Well, gee, Judge, we don’t have any information like that...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.