Looking forward to @GenFlynn speaking at my event in La Quinta Friday, March 16. God Bless America I wonder what he’ll say about @RepMaxineWaters
“What I'm not here to do, is I'm not here to complain about who has done me wrong, or how unfair I've been treated or how unfair the entire [Mueller investigation] process has been,” Flynn said to laughter from supporters as he introduced Navarro at the rally. “You know, it is what it is."
Supporters were reportedly shocked. They couldn't believe the news. Nor could I, this soon. Incredibly, on March 16th (when Attorney General Sessions fired deep state leaker and liar Andrew McCabe*) General Michael Flynn, President Trump's former National Security Adviser (who pled guilty to lying to the FBI) was out in California jubilantly stumping for Hispanic politician Omar Navarro, a GOP candidate for the House. Flynn after being absent from politics for more than a year was unexpectedly back hoping to cause a national sensation; but overshadowed by the news about McCabe - a man who did him wrong (see postscript) - Flynn failed to get the media coverage he wanted and deserved.
Now Navarro, a radical, pro-Trump, right-wing conservative who's campaigning on the Trumpian inspired theme "Make California Great Again" is running for the seat held by rabid, anti-Trumper Maxine Waters. Poor, stupid, dumb, "Low IQ" Waters (as Trump hilariously calls her) is the lunatic supporter of Jew hating, racist, black supremacist Lewis Farrakhan, who obsessed with conspiracy theories involving Trump and Russia has accused him of treason (being part of a secret, subversive "Kremlin Klan") and often calls for his impeachment. Water's delighted that Flynn was supporting her opponent (himself a felon for putting a tracking device on his wife's car) quipped that "now he's taking his lies to Palm Beach." But Flynn, an honest man, brought no lies with him that day.
Flynn whose legal problems were killing him financially stopped the bleeding by pleading guilty to making false statements to the FBI about a legal conversation he had (during the transition) with former Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak; this was conditional on giving Robert Mueller his undivided and full cooperation with investigators in the Russia-Trump collusion probe (which has come to naught).
Trump haters surmised and fantasized that Flynn, who was practically Trump's left hand campaign man, has incriminating evidence on him colluding with Russia on interfering with the 2016 election; and, they believe (and want badly to be true), that Mueller with the dirt Flynn provides will indict Trump, get him impeached and save the country from the nightmare of his America First presidency.
But this isn't happening, nor will it. For Flynn suddenly and abruptly jumping back into the political ring and campaigning for the strongly pro-Trump Navarro (running against the worst Trump derangement nut in Congress) is clearly signaling that he's anything but a cooperating witness against the President; that he hasn't turned against him (or anyone else in the campaign) to save his hide or that of his son's (as many believe); it's a certain, strong, positive signal that like Omar Navarro he Mike Flynn is defiantly loyal to Donald Trump; that he supports him and his movement 1000%, and is doing nothing with Never Trumper Robert Mueller to hurt him.
In other words, General Flynn, it appears, is defying Mueller and violating the terms of his plea agreement - thus putting himself (and son?) at risk of spending a full five years in jail...the maximum penalty for lying to the Feds. But Flynn is unfazed and doesn't seem to care; and here, I believe, is the reason why:
What appears to be happening (as I wrote about here) is that Flynn is in the process of withdrawing or vacating his guilty plea due to gross prosecutorial abuse uncovered by his judge: that Mueller unlawfully tricked or forced Flynn to plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit, and had evidence of his innocence. This (ignored by MSM) is what's at issue now in the courts; and the major development that happened Tuesday (cited by Sarah Carter) of Mueller turning over all discoverable evidence of Flynn's innocence to ball busting Judge Emmet Sullivan is ominous for Mueller's investigation and reputation - and a downer for Trump haters who were foolishly counting on Flynn.
An innocent Ted Stevens indicted and found guilty on seven counts of lying in the infamous false statements case - where DOJ prosecutors hid exculpatory evidence.
Judge Sullivan (a Clinton appointee), who replaced in the case recused Judge Rudy Contraeus (an Obama appointee), is an expert on prosecutorial malfeasance; in fact, he's famous for presiding over the Ted Stevens corruption trial where DOJ prosecutors falsely accused the Republican Senator of seven counts of making false statements; this cost him his Senate seat before he lost his life in a plane crash. In short, it was the prosecutors who criminally lied to Judge Sullivan and made false statements about Stevens, not Stevens who lied to them or to anyone; and Sullivan digging up a ton of dirt uncovered the worse prosecutorial abuse case in US history; so bad and damning was the evidence against the DOJ that it caused one prosecutor, who was facing possible disbarment and jail time, to commit suicide (see).
Similarly, Mueller, it seems, illegally framed the General with a fabricated crime, and that could mean curtains for him and his get Trump impeachment investigation. No wonder why Flynn is the soul of cheerfulness, optimism and mirth lately (smiling at Waters and anyone who calls him a liar and felon); with Judge Sullivan's help he'll soon (like Ted Stevens) be exonerated, taking down Mueller instead of Donald Trump.
Indeed, Mueller's misconduct is based on the fact that James Comey when FBI Chief, contradicting Mueller, testified to Congress last year that Flynn was truthful to investigators when questioned about his call with Kislyak. As I wrote here after that interview Flynn it seems no longer mattered to the FBI as there were no follow up meetings with him. This wouldn't have been the case if Flynn was caught blatantly lying to them as stated in his indictment; for other meetings would have been needed to get to the bottom of it. Indeed, from Flynn's meeting on January 24th with (hyperpartisan, Trump hating) investigator Peter Strzok* to Comey's firing on May 9th he Flynn fell off the FBI's radar screen and was all but dead to them because his interview raised no concerns or red flags.
*Strzok and friend acting deep state AG Sally Yates wanted badly to nail Flynn. In fact, Yates wanted to prosecute him on the never enforced, antiquated Logan Act because of his communications with Kislyak. Investigating a Logan violation is what prompted Strzok's unwarranted interview with Flynn; by the way, this was authorized by none other than Andrew McCabe who had an ax to grind with Flynn (see postscript).
But that was to change 180 degrees when Mueller became special counsel. As Flynn was financially going broke, and President Trump reportedly wouldn't help him with his legal bills (see), Mueller taking advantage of this offered Flynn something like the following deal:
'Cooperate with me and plead guilty to lying to the FBI and I'll spare you what I did to Manafort and Gates and continued financial hardship; for like them you made money working as an unregistered agent for a foreign government; and I'll indict you for money laundering and tax fraud like I did to them.'
An intimidated Flynn (a lobbyist for Turkey) accepted the deal believing, apparently, that Mueller had a valid case for charging him with lying; but he and his lawyers were deceived...but not for long as providence would have it.
For on December 1st when Flynn pled guilty before Judge Contreras and his deal went public it apparently triggered an angry reaction with some Republican lawmakers - one or several Congressmen (McConnell, Burr, Ryan, Nunes) who heard Comey testify to Flynn's innocence contacted Chief Justice Roberts (or some other high ranking judge) to inform him about the discrepancy between Comey and Mueller. Then six days later on December 7th Roberts (or whoever) FORCED Contreras to recuse himself from the case (turns out he was friends with Peter Strzok see) and randomly* replaced him with Judge Sullivan.
*I have a hard time believing it was random. Then again God works in strange ways.
Sullivan then did three things: 1. He lengthened Mueller's request to extend Flynn's sentencing date; Mueller wanted a 90 extension to mid-March, but Sullivan tacted on another 60 days to mid-May; this obviously was done to give Sullivan enough time to study Flynn's case.
2. Sullivan superseding Flynn's guilty plea said that if any evidence of Flynn's innocence was withheld from him during plea negotiations that it was in violation of his due process rights; and that this invalidated the plea deal giving Flynn the right to vacate his guilty plea.
And 3. if Mueller had a problem with disclosing any exculpatory evidence to Flynn (which he apparently did*) that it must be submitted to him, Judge Sullivan; and that he'd decide what to disclose to Flynn (see).
*It is interesting to note that Sullivan ordered Mueller to do this in early December, and that he dragged his feet taking him almost four months to comply. God knows what private threats Sullivan made to Mueller to light a fire under him. In the Steven's case he held DOJ prosecutors in contempt (see).
In other words, if there was zero evidence of Flynn's innocence nothing would've been given to the judge. And what Mueller certainly gave to him (among other things and most importantly) were the exculpatory notes to Flynn's interview with the FBI of January 24, 2017*. These notes (in their original, unaltered form) will explain to the defense why the FBI didn't charge Flynn with the crime of lying to them while Comey was its director - vs. Mueller so charging him ten months after the interview as if he knew better than the investigators.
Moreover, with Mueller and Comey in contradiction Mueller would have to explain the discrepancy to Judge Sullivan and Flynn. He'd have to prove that Comey and his interrogators screwed up; that they incompetently missed the smoking gun; and that the transcripts or notes of the interview conclusively proved that Flynn INTENTIONALLY lied; and that Mueller was justified in charging him with a crime.
It's important to note that Byron York who brought to light Comey's testimony of Flynn's innocence reported that he Comey indicated to lawmakers that there were minor inaccuracies (things misremembered) in Flynn's answers to Strzok - but they weren't intentional or criminal. And these innocent inaccuracies were as close to Flynn came to lying to investigators.
As of today, right now that's where things stand. But Flynn's sudden, extraordinary, reappearance in politics (returning as the happy warrior), looking like the confident man who campaigned for Trump in 2016 (as if nothing terrible has happened to him), can only be seen as a sign that things are going well for him; that the worst is behind him; and that he's about to withdraw his guilty plea with the blessing of Judge Sullivan, and pull the rug out from under corrupt, witch hunter, Never Trumper Robert Mueller.
It is totally fascinating that Michael Flynn's first public appearance since he was fired as Trump's National Security Adviser should coincide with the firing of former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe of the FBI. For it was McCabe who set up the sit down between Flynn and Strzok; and it was McCabe (according to investigative journalist Michael Cernovich) who allegedly altered Strzok's notes on the interview making it seem that Flynn lied.
It is reported that McCabe intensely disliked Michael Flynn because of his support for agent Robyn Gritz who filed a sexual discrimination complaint against the bureau in 2013 (see). McCabe fought Gritz and her complaint tooth and nail, and Flynn defended her against him.
Question is will Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report on McCabe's misconduct and misdeeds include Cernovich's allegations on the altered notes? Will it mention McCade's animus toward Flynn because of his defense of Robyn Gritz?
And is Justice Sullivan waiting for the IG's report on McCabe before he makes the decision to nullify Flynn's plea agreement with Mueller, and then launch a criminal investigation into Mueller's probe? What a time to be alive; it's amazing what's going on.
As you may recall in late March 2017 Mike Flynn requested from Congress immunity from prosecution as a condition for testifying about Russian meddling in the 2016 election. But Flynn didn't want immunity from crimes he committed; he wanted it to shield himself from what he said was "the highly politicized witch hunt environment against UNFAIR prosecution." What he possibly had in mind was being charged with violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).
This is a law requiring agents of foreign governments lobbying in the US to register with the DOJ and report on their earnings and activities. This law is rarely enforced, and only seven Americans were prosecuted for it over the last 50 years with one conviction.
But Flynn who worked and earned money as an unregistered agent for Turkey could have been unfairly charged with this crime and other things related to it. This happened to Paul Manafort and Rick Gates: they were unfairly charged by Mueller with money laundering stemming from their earnings for the work they did lobbying for the Ukraine. And indeed, when Flynn pled guilty to lying (as I mentioned above) scalp hunter Mueller probably held a FARA based money laundering charge over his head - the unfair prosecution he feared. I wrote about this here.