Looks like Gen. Flynn was framed.

[vantexan]

to take the view that the FBI had no reasonable investigative predicate for the Flynn case on Jan. 24, 2017, one has to believe that the following fact-pattern, considered in its entirety, provides no reasonably articulable basis for a counterintelligence concern:

• A senior official with a TS/SCI (top secret/sensitive compartmented information) clearance working in the White House has ties to various Russian government entities.
• He has traveled to Russia and taken large sums of money from a state-controlled Russian media outfit.
• As the investigation of these matters was winding down, he had phone conversations with the Russian ambassador at a time when the United States had just imposed sanctions on Russia for interfering in the 2016 elections. In those conversations, he had asked that Russia to respond only in a measured fashion.
• He subsequently lied to the vice president of the United States and other White House officials about the substance of those calls, causing the White House to issue inaccurate statements to the public.
• The Russian government was aware of these lies, having participated in the phone calls, and the official was thus potentially subject to blackmail.

Was he convicted of wrongdoing other than lying to the FBI? You're trying to smear him to justify what the FBI did.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

to take the view that the FBI had no reasonable investigative predicate for the Flynn case on Jan. 24, 2017, one has to believe that the following fact-pattern, considered in its entirety, provides no reasonably articulable basis for a counterintelligence concern:

• A senior official with a TS/SCI (top secret/sensitive compartmented information) clearance working in the White House has ties to various Russian government entities.
• He has traveled to Russia and taken large sums of money from a state-controlled Russian media outfit.
• As the investigation of these matters was winding down, he had phone conversations with the Russian ambassador at a time when the United States had just imposed sanctions on Russia for interfering in the 2016 elections. In those conversations, he had asked that Russia to respond only in a measured fashion.
• He subsequently lied to the vice president of the United States and other White House officials about the substance of those calls, causing the White House to issue inaccurate statements to the public.
• The Russian government was aware of these lies, having participated in the phone calls, and the official was thus potentially subject to blackmail.

You just doubled down on the same author's rubbish. You need to look him up.

 

[fishtm2001]

Was he convicted of wrongdoing other than lying to the FBI? You're trying to smear him to justify what the FBI did.

He plead guilty and was awaiting sentencing.

 

[fishtm2001]

In terms of bringing and winning cases, yesterday's debacle will haunt the DOJ for years. Michael Flynn won’t nearly be the last criminal to benefit from that.

 

[Babagounj]

"It is exceptionally rare for the U.S. Department of Justice to move in court to dismiss a case in which a defendant has—ably assisted by first-class lawyers—entered into a plea agreement to spare himself prosecution on more serious felony charges. It is rarer still for the government to do so without acknowledging that it violated any law or that the defendant’s rights were somehow infringed. And it is still rarer yet for the government to take such a move without a single career prosecutor being willing to sign onto the brief seeking dismissal."

Lawfare

Flynn's own lawyers with held vital information from him.

 

[vantexan]

He plead guilty and was awaiting sentencing.

The Mueller investigation initiated that prosecution. Was he charged with anything besides lying to the FBI?

 

[Babagounj]

The Deep State needed Flynn removed in order to continue their quest to railroad Trump.
It's that simple.
They knew Flynn would have access to their files and expose them for the crooks they are.
The FBI has a history of framing people for crimes that they never committed.
Meuller's conviction rate has always been based on threats and financial ruin, never on any real evidence.
Did you notice all the "alleged" Russians who Mueller said were involved had the charges dismissed.
Why?
Because they fought back and asked for their day in court.
And poor Mueller had nothing solid on any of them.

 

[Babagounj]

I can't wait for Phase Two.
Where Flynn starts legal procedures against all those who tried to frame him.
At the very least some should lose their law licenses.
Let's see them lose their homes to pay for their legal defenses.

 

[oldngray]

The Deep State needed Flynn removed in order to continue their quest to railroad Trump.
It's that simple.
They knew Flynn would have access to their files and expose them for the crooks they are.
The FBI has a history of framing people for crimes that they never committed.
Meuller's conviction rate has always been based on threats and financial ruin, never on any real evidence.
Did you notice all the "alleged" Russians who Mueller said were involved had the charges dismissed.
Why?
Because they fought back and asked for their day in court.
And poor Mueller had nothing solid on any of them.

Mueller was just a (possibly senile) figurehead while the angry Democrats ran the investigation. And used Weissmann (who has a long history of misconduct) to prosecute.

 

[oldngray]

I can't wait for Phase Two.
Where Flynn starts legal procedures against all those who tried to frame him.
At the very least some should lose their law licenses.
Let's see them lose their homes to pay for their legal defenses.

The problem is the swamp protects their own and usually little is done to those who commit misconduct. At most they will get fired (mostly pointless with many of them already leaving for other jobs) or get a meaningless lateral transfer to some other department. Barr has already hinted that there might be little done because despite the wrong behavior it would be difficult to get a conviction in court.

 

[Babagounj]

Mueller was just a (possibly senile) figurehead while the angry Democrats ran the investigation. And used Weissmann (who has a long history of misconduct) to prosecute.

Both need to be legally disgraced.
Let that make it into the history books.

 

[Babagounj]

There is enough evidence to charge some with perjury ; see transcripts given before Congress and then the falsehoods they stated on programs with the MSM.

 

[oldngray]

There is enough evidence to charge some with perjury ; see transcripts given before Congress and then the falsehoods they stated on programs with the MSM.

for example:

Under Oath, Evelyn Farkas Admitted She Never Had Collusion Evidence

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Rubbish as usual from you.

 

[Sportello]

for example:

Under Oath, Evelyn Farkas Admitted She Never Had Collusion Evidence

Mueller laid out overwhelming evidence of collusion.

I weep for my country.

 

[rickyb]

FBI is....corrupt???

you dont say!:

 

[Benben]

The interview was conducted without any investigative basis which means it didn't matter whether statements made were true or not.

OMG! It amazes me there are idiots in this country who will swallow whatever their side says without a second thought!!!

So now, according to republicans, lying to the FBI is perfectly fine as long as you claim......what, that they "shouldn't be looked at?"

The United States Attorney General just declared lying to anyone a non-criminal act!!!

That, ladies and gentelmen, is what tRump has reduced our country to!

 

[floridays]

OMG! It amazes me there are idiots in this country who will swallow whatever their side says without a second thought!!!

So now, according to republicans, lying to the FBI is perfectly fine as long as you claim......what, that they "shouldn't be looked at?"

The United States Attorney General just declared lying to anyone a non-criminal act!!!

That, ladies and gentelmen, is what tRump has reduced our country to!

You have a problem with facts.
I'll play the game though.

You guys have tried nailing Trump with obstruction, it has failed each time, fact.

I have a simple question, it will be simple to answer.

If Trump had a server, and it was subpoenaed, and the court then compelled compliance but he had it (them) destroyed, would you personally claim he obstructed justice?

Easy yes or no.

Yes or no is all I want.

 

[floridays]

I see you get your information from bought and paid for liberal legal analists.

What do you say we just wait and see how this plays out.
We'll see which of us has egg on their face.

I may be a jerk but I do have a speck of integrity left.

 

[Benben]

You have a problem with facts.
I'll play the game though.

You guys have tried nailing Trump with obstruction, it has failed each time, fact.

I have a simple question, it will be simple to answer.

If Trump had a server, and it was subpoenaed, and the court then compelled compliance but he had it (them) destroyed, would you personally claim he obstructed justice?

Easy yes or no.

Yes or no is all I want.

But..but...but.....What about Hillary???

I find it amazing that the sheeple blindly follow the liar-in-chief, who has not complied with 1 subpoena in 3 years, bring up something from 7+ years ago that has nothing to do with anything!!!

Nice try at deflection though!