I’ve been listening to and reading a lot of stuff about the Flynn case and I think I have all these points correct.
Very early in the Trump administration, the FBI sent 2 agents to talk to Michael Flynn about a December phone conversation Flynn had had with the Russian ambassador.
This conversation was perfectly proper for the incoming National Security Adviser.
In a 2018 interview, James Comey bragged about how he had figured the Trump administration hadn’t gotten their act together enough to know that nobody should agree to an interview without a White House attorney present.
So they called Flynn and told him they wanted a friendly chat and he said sure. Before going over, they discussed how to give him the mandatory warning about not lying without making him suspicious about their intentions (which were bad).
There is no record of the interview. The agents did not electronically record the conversation and their notes about the interview have gone missing.
They said at the time that they believed Flynn was truthful, but somehow later, somebody decided he should be prosecuted for having lied.
Even if he had lied, how would they know? Our intelligence agencies did not have warrants to wiretap either Kislyak or Flynn, yet somehow they claim to have a transcript of the call.
Except they won’t say where it came from and they refuse to produce it.
Question: How could they prosecute a man for lying during an interview about what he said during a previous phone call when they don’t have a record of either the interview or the phone call?
Answer: They couldn’t. The only reason Flynn and his lawyers didn’t laugh at the DOJ and walk out the door is that the government threatened to railroad his son if Flynn didn’t plead guilty to something he never did … when all along the government HAD NO CASE.