Hi everyone!
Well, this is my inaugural post on Steemit, and I've decided to start with a topic that has been getting just a bit of attention. I'm not a fan of long, lengthy, dry articles, and I'll be doing my best to avoid subjecting you to them.
The Mueller investigation has so many layers, twists and turns that it just isn't practical to try tackling them all in a single bound. Instead, let's focus on understanding key events.
General Michael Flynn has pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the FBI. He was asked about details of two conversations he had with Russian ambassador Kislyak in December of 2016 (post-election). He appears to have lied about the specifics of their conversation(s) as pertains to the UN vote on Israel, which the Obama administration was widely admonished for abstaining from.
A common misconception is that this effectively proves or implies election-related collusion between Team Trump and Russia. What it actually proves is that you should never get clever and speak to authorities without a lawyer present!
These discussions took place after the election, so it proves nothing about election rigging. But why would Flynn admit to talking with a Russian ambassador, yet lie about a seemingly innocuous element of those conversations?
Reason #1: He didn't realize the FBI had recordings of his conversations obtained through FISA warrants. The FBI was likely looking to trap him in exactly this situation.
Reason #2: He didn't want to admit that the incoming Trump administration was actively working against Obama's UN position (and seeking Russia's help in doing so), as that behavior is frowned upon in Washington.
One count of lying to the FBI is a weak charge hardly worth the FBI's time, only made possible by the existence of the "Russia Collusion" investigation and [potentially illegitimate] FISA warrants. That's what the talking-heads mean by a "process crime" -- a crime created within the investigative process itself. So why did Flynn plead guilty? Is he cooperating with Mueller to take down Trump? Doubtful.
As Andrew McCarthy (former U.S. attorney) has written at National Review, that's not how it works. Mueller almost certainly had nothing on Flynn other than this single low-grade charge, and Flynn pleaded guilty because legal costs were leaving him in financial ruin and wrecking his family. Ordinarily, Mueller probably wouldn't have bothered, but he's under some pressure to look productive.
Alright folks, that's all for now. You can tell your friends that the Flynn charge is a nothing-burger, and we're all still waiting to see any real evidence -- with the added challenge that "collusion" isn't even a crime.
I'd like to continue posting on this and other topics, but will need your support :-)
-RSG