Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
The FBI knew Flynn had lied before the interview. Getting him to continue his dishonesty on the record isn't entrapment, it's good police work. Think about it, Obama slaps sanctions on Russia for election interference, Flynn talks to Russia about it, then lies to cover it up. The FBI didn't engineer this...it is the facts from the case.
|
Before the interview, the FBI was ready to drop the case against Flynn. It did not find that he did anything wrong. Nor was his conversation with kislyak illegal or treasonous. As the incoming National Security Adviser, it was not some illegal, nefarious, "talks to Russia," it was a perfectly legal conversation in response to the Russian Ambassador calling him and questioning a policy issue. Flynn did not say anything treasonous in the call. And knew that his call had been monitored. So there was no reason to lie about it. The FBI knew what was said on the call and had no need to have Flynn regurgitate the details. The sole purpose of questioning Flynn was to entrap him in a perjury charge. If Flynn didn't remember correctly and said the wrong thing, it was not a deliberate lie, but they would have what they really wanted. What they wanted was not to convict a traitor or criminal, it was to remove an obstacle that would frustrate their intention to preserve the Trump-Russia probe, as Andy McCarthy wrote:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...-russia-probe/
If Flynn had actually done something treacherous or illegal (other than so-called lying to the FBI), he would have, and should have, been prosecuted for that. They had no evidence of him doing any of that. They had no evidentiary reason for any further investigation of him (as I noted above, they were ready to close the investigation of Flynn), but he had to be removed in order to protect the attempt to continue the bogus Trump/Russia conspiracy. McCarthy spells it out very well in the above linked article.
Threaded Mode