Home » Was Flynn Framed?

Was Flynn Framed?

by Domain Admin

By Tim Suereth

Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn has spent his career as a dedicated military man.  He served in the U.S. Army with distinction and honor for more than three decades before being chosen by President Obama to be his director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and then hired as National Security Advisor by President Donald Trump to fill a position that would have him oversee United States national security issues around the globe.

Flynn pleaded guilty last week to charges that he lied to the FBI during their interrogation of him, not for anything related to Russian meddling in the U.S. elections, but for possible violations of the Logan Act, an unenforceable and never used law from 1799 which forbids private citizens from negotiating disputes with foreign countries, without authorization.  Special prosecutor Robert Mueller was not able to find evidence that Flynn had committed a crime, so he laid out perjury traps to trick him into a lie.

When asked by an FBI interrogator if he had had conversations with foreign officials Flynn apparently stated no, although he did in fact have a phone conversation with the Russian Ambassador in late December to ask that their government not retaliate against America for recent sanctions president Obama had just placed on Russia as he was leaving office – in an apparent effort to harm Trumps efforts of establishing a friendlier relationship with the Russian Federation.


But why would Flynn lie?  That is the question that has been circulating through the media networks and blogosphere for the past week.  If Flynn did nothing wrong or illegal and had nothing to hide – why would he lie?  To answer that question we would need to look at the circumstances surrounding his supposed lie and see the interview transcripts to understand what questions were asked of Flynn, how they were actually answered, what tactics were used to manipulate his responses and maybe most importantly – who was his interrogator.

The FBI has gone light on Democrats such as Hillary Clinton in the past but they have been going after Trump associates with a vengeance.  A clear example of partisan prosecution is evidenced by the man who was sent by Special Prosecutor Bob Mueller to interview General Flynn. His name is Peter Strzok, an ardent Trump hater, who was recently fired by the FBI for inappropriate anti-trump messages he was sending to other FBI colleagues, including FBI Deputy Director Andrew Mcabe’s attorney, Lisa Page – who happens to be the girlfriend of Peter Strzok

Strzok also played a key role in analyzing and validating the Dodgy Dossier that was given to the FBI by operatives of the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign, which has been used to get FISA search warrants to spy on Trump confidants during and after the presidential campaign.

Strzok is the same agent who altered former FBI Director James Comey’s analysts of the Clinton email server scandal that changed Comey’s assessment of Hillary Clinton from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” 

Why would Special Prosecutor Bob Mueller send a known Trump hater to interview Flynn? It is another unethical and suspicious move by the special prosecutors office that makes us all question their motives and integrity.

When Flynn was interviewed at the White House by the FBI on January 24th, he had no idea he was entering an interrogation.  He was initially contacted by Deputy FBI Director Andrew Macabe, by phone, to tell him that there were some FBI agents on their way over and that they had clearance to get through the gate.  Flynn thought that the agents were coming over to do some additional training of security protocols around the White House that had been going on through the previous week so he was completely unprepared for the interrogation.  He did not realize he was even being interviewed until a few minutes into a conversation with the FBI agents at his office.  He did not have an attorney present, or was given the opportunity to have one.  Instead, FBI agent Peter Strzok was successful in confusing and rattling General Flynn until he got the lie he was looking for.

 A former U.S. intelligence official told Hannity.com, “with the recent revelation that Strzok was removed from the Special Counsel investigation for making anti-Trump text messages it seems likely that the accuracy and veracity of the Flynn’s interview as a whole should be reviewed and called into question. The most logical thing to happen would be to call the other FBI Special Agent present during Flynn’s interview before the Grand Jury to recount his version.  How logical is it that Flynn is being charged for lying to an agent whose character and neutrality was called into question by the Special Counsel.”  

The FBI surveillance of General Flynn began out of an illegal unmasking of Trump associates and presidential campaign staff by Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice during the 2016 election, and due to the now discredited DNC funded Dodgy Dossier. So the Obama administration illegally surveil the incoming NSA Advisor and then use it to set up a perjury trap for Flynn who is engaged in perfectly legal and patriotic activity. #entrapment#BSIndictment#set-up.

After an election has been decided, a president-elect, and his staff, have the absolute right to communicate with dignitaries, future co-workers or exiting employees, in their transition into office, especially for someone like Flynn who was a leading member of Trumps transition team. Any member of the presidential transition team is a federal government employee, paid by the federal government, and they possess a federal email address.

It is common practice for candidates and president-elects to use emissaries with foreign leaders during a campaign and during the transition, and it is perfectly legal to have diplomatic back channel communications while president elect, especially if the prior administration is passing laws during their last month in office that they know are contrary to the next administrations policies.

Candidates often meet with world leaders throughout an election campaign to show the public that they are capable of international negotiations.  It’s hardly a case of treason.  If so, Obama should be in jail for the rest of his life for the grand diplomatic tour he took during his presidential campaign.  To threaten Flynn with a 5-year prison sentence for making a phone call to a diplomat during the presidential transition term seems extreme – and politically motivated.

During Obama’s 2008 presidential election, CNN reported, “Obama is expected to meet Israel’s top leaders: President Shimon Peres, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Likud Party leader Benjamin Netanyahu; and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salaam Fayad. Obama can expect a friendly reception in Europe, where he will meet Thursday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. In addition to Merkel, Obama is slated to meet with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Conservative Party Leader David Cameron as well as French President Nicolas Sarkozy.”   

Obama also openly used emissaries to meet with foreign leaders during his presidential transition.

Flynn and the Trump administration had good reason for reaching out to Russia.  They were requesting that Russia does not retaliate for the recent sanctions Obama placed on their country on the last days of his presidency.  Just a few days after Trump won the presidential election, his team cautioned the Obama administration to not pursue any new damaging foreign policy initiatives that did not align with President Trumps priorities, but within his last month in office, during the transition, Obama enacted new sanctions against Russia, for apparent meddling in the U.S election. 

A Trump advisor complained to Politico, “I don’t think it’s in keeping with the spirit of the transition (for Obama) to try to push through agenda items that are contrary to the president-elect’s positions.” 

The call Flynn made to the Russian Ambassador was intended to deter the Russians from taking hostile actions against the U.S. in response to the sanctions and to try to stabilize current relations between the two superpowers.  Flynn should be commended for his proactive efforts to tell the Russians to stand down and to not retaliate against the United States.  That seems like a patriotic act to me, not treason – but somehow he is facing 5 years in prison for it.

Esteemed attorney Alan Dershowitz argued, “Not only was that request not criminal, it was the right thing to do.”

Former Democratic CIA director Leon Panetta said it was a stretch to say these contacts broke the law  

Any punishment against Flynn for his inconsequential untruth, that helped protect American’s, would seem out of line considering that ex-CIA Director James Clapper lied under oath to Congress, and the entire American populous, when he assured us all on live national television that there was no mass surveillance of United States citizens.  We now now that to be a bold faced lie.  So Clapper lies about illegal unconstitutional meta-data collection – no penalty. The FBI illegally wiretaps Flynn and uses the fruits of the tap to set up a perjury trap for him.  This is clear evidence of why President Trump needs to command more control of his intelligence agencies, and clean house.

The real Russian collusion comes in the form of Uranium One.  Have you read the Podesta files?  

You may also like

Leave a Comment