Mueller Charges Against Flynn Exonerate Trump of Russian Collusion by Publius Tacitus

The news of Mike Flynn's plea agreement with special prosecutor Robert Mueller was trumpeted on the media as if Flynn had admitted to killing Kennedy or had unprotected sex with Vladimir Putin. But once I took time to read the actual agreement I realized, not surprisingly, the the media lynch mob was blinded by hatred and unwilling to think objectively or fairly about the matter. The evidence exonerates Donald Trump of  having colluded with the Russians but does expose Michael Flynn as a man of terrible judgment when it comes to talking to the FBI. There was nothing that Flynn did with the Russians that was wrong or improper. 

Here are the key details for you to judge for yourself:

STATEMENT OF THE OFFENSE (link)

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, the United States of America and the defendant, MICHAEL T. FLYNN, stipulate and agree that the following facts are true and accurate. These facts do not constitute all of the facts known to the parties concerning the charged offense; they are being submitted to demonstrate that sufficient facts exist that the defendant committed the offense to which he is pleading guilty.

1.    The defendant, MICHAEL T. FLYNN, who served as a surrogate and national security advisor for the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump ("Campaign"), as a senior member of President-Elect Trump's Transition Team ("Presidential Transition Team"), and as the National Security Advisor to President Trump, made materially false statements and omissions during an interview with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") on January 24, 2017, in Washington, D.C. At the time of the interview, the FBI had an open investigation into the Government of Russia's ("Russia") efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, including the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Campaign and Russia, and whether there was any coordination between the Campaign and Russia's efforts.

2.    FLYNN's false statements and omissions impeded and otherwise had a material impact on the FBI's ongoing investigation into the existence of any links or coordination between individuals associated with the Campaign and Russia's efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.

False Statements Regarding FLYNN's Request to the Russian Ambassador that Russia Refrain from Escalating the Situation in Response to U.S. Sanctions against Russia

 

3.    On or about January 24, 2017, FLYNN agreed to be interviewed by agents from the FBI ("January 24 voluntary interview"). During the interview, FLYNN falsely stated that he did not ask Russia's  Ambassador to the United States ("Russian Ambassador") to refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against Russia. FLYNN also falsely  stated that he did not remember a follow-up conversation in which the Russian Ambassador stated that Russia had chosen to moderate its response to those sanctions as a result of FLYNN's  request. In truth and in fact, however, FLYNN then and there knew that the following had occurred:

a.    On or about December 28, 2016, then-President Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13757, which was to take effect the following day. The executive order announced sanctions against Russia in response to that government's actions intended to interfere with the 2016 presidential election ("U.S. Sanctions").

b.    On or about December 28, 2016, the Russian Ambassador contacted FLYNN,

c.    On or about December 29, 2016, FLYNN called a senior official of the Presidential Transition Team ("PTT official"), who was with other senior members of the Presidential Transition Team at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, to discuss what, if anything, to communicate to the Russian Ambassador about the U.S. Sanctions. On that call, FLYNN and the PTT official discussed the U.S. Sanctions, including the potential impact of those sanctions on the incoming administration's foreign policy goals. The PTT official and FLYNN also discussed that the members of the Presidential Transition Team at Mar-a-Lago did not want Russia to escalate the situation.

d.    Immediately after his phone call with the PTT official, FLYNN called the Russian Ambassador and requested that Russia not escalate the situation and only respond to the U.S. Sanctions in a reciprocal manner.

e.    Shortly after his phone call with the Russian Ambassador, FLYNN spoke with the PTT official to report on the substance of his call with the Russian Ambassador, including their discussion of the U.S. Sanctions.

f.   On or about December 30, 2016, Russian President Vladimir Putin released a statement indicating that Russia would not take retaliatory measures in response to the U.S. Sanctions at that time.

g.    On or about December 31, 2016, the Russian Ambassador called FLYNN  and informed him that Russia had chosen not to retaliate in response to FLYNN's request.

h.    After his phone call with the Russian Ambassador, FLYNN spoke with senior members of the Presidential Transition Team about FLYNN's conversations with the Russian Ambassador regarding the U.S. Sanctions and Russia's decision not to escalate the situation.

False Statements Regarding FLYNN's Request that Foreign Officials Vote Against or Delay a United Nations Security Council Resolution

4.    During the January 24 voluntary interview, FLYNN made additional false statements about calls he made to Russia and several other countries regarding a resolution submitted by Egypt to the United Nations Security Council on December 21, 2016. Specifically FLYNN falsely stated that he only asked the countries' positions on the vote, and that he did not request that any of the countries take any particular action on the resolution. FLYNN also falsely stated that the Russian Ambassador never described to him Russia's response to FLYNN's request regarding the resolution. In truth and in fact, however, FLYNN then and there knew that the following had occurred:

a.    On or about December 21, 2016, Egypt submitted a resolution to the United Nations Security Council on the issue of Israeli settlements ("resolution"). The United Nations Security Council was scheduled to vote on the resolution the following day.

b.    On or about December 22, 2016, a very senior member of the Presidential Transition Team directed FLYNN to contact officials from foreign governments, including Russia, to learn where each government stood on the resolution and to influence those governments to delay the vote or defeat the resolution.

c.    On or about December 22, 2016, FLYNN contacted the Russian Ambassador about the pending vote. FLYNN informed the Russian Ambassador about the incoming administration's opposition to the resolution, and requested that Russia vote against or delay the resolution

d.    On or about December 23, 2016, FLYNN again spoke with the Russian Ambassador, who informed FLYNN that if it came to a vote Russia would not vote against the resolution.

Other False Statements Regarding FLYNN's Contacts with Foreign Governments

5.    On March 7, 2017, FLYNN filed multiple documents with the Department of  Justice pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act ("FARA") pertaining to a project performed by him and his company, the Flynn Intel Group, Inc. ("FIG"), for the principal benefit of the Republic of Turkey ("Turkey project"). In the FARA filings, FLYNN made materially false statements and omissions, including by falsely staling that (a) FIG did not know whether or the extent to which the Republic of Turkey was involved in the Turkey project, (b) the Turkey project was focused on improving U.S. business organizations' confidence regarding doing business in Turkey, and (c) an op-ed by FLYNN published in The Hill on November 8, 2016, was written at his own initiative; and by omitting that officials from the Republic of Turkey provided supervision and direction over the Turkey project.

Robert S. Mueller III
Special Counsel

Now, let's sort out what actually happened with respect to Russia (you can only figure this out after reading the entire charge). Let's re-write the Mueller "charge" chronologically and look at how the meaning changes:

December 21, 2016--Egypt submitted a resolution to the United Nations Security Council on the issue of Israeli settlements ("resolution").

December 22, 2016--a very senior member of the Presidential Transition Team (reportedly Jared Kushner) directed FLYNN to contact officials from foreign governments, including Russia, to learn where each government stood on the resolution and to influence those governments to delay the vote or defeat the resolution.

December 23, 2016--FLYNN again spoke with the Russian Ambassador, who informed FLYNN that if it came to a vote Russia would not vote against the resolution.

On this same day, President-elect Trump spoke with Egyptian leader Sisi, who agreed to withdraw the resolution (link).

[I would note that there is nothing illegal or wrong about any of this. Quite an appropriate action, in fact, for an incoming President. Moreover, if Trump and the Russians had been conspiring before the November election, why would Trump and team even need to persuade the Russian Ambassador to do the biding of Trump on this issue?]

December 28, 2016--President Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13757, which was to take effect the following day, imposing sanctions on Russia. Russian Ambassador Kislyak called General Flynn (who was vacationing in the Caribbean).

December 29, 2016, FLYNN called a senior official of the Presidential Transition Team ("PTT official"), who was with other senior members of the Presidential Transition Team at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, to discuss what, if anything, to communicate to the Russian Ambassador about the U.S. Sanctions. On that call, FLYNN and the PTT official discussed the U.S. Sanctions, including the potential impact of those sanctions on the incoming administration's foreign policy goals. The PTT official and FLYNN also discussed that the members of the Presidential Transition Team at Mar-a-Lago did not want Russia to escalate the situation.

• FLYNN called the Russian Ambassador and requested that Russia not escalate the situation and only respond to the U.S. Sanctions in a reciprocal manner.
• Shortly after his phone call with the Russian Ambassador, FLYNN spoke with the PTT official to report on the substance of his call with the Russian Ambassador, including their discussion of the U.S. Sanctions.

December 31, 2016--the Russian Ambassador called FLYNN  and informed him that Russia had chosen not to retaliate in response to FLYNN's request.

After his phone call with the Russian Ambassador, FLYNN spoke with senior members of the Presidential Transition Team about FLYNN's conversations with the Russian Ambassador regarding the U.S. Sanctions and Russia's decision not to escalate the situation.

The real crime of Michael Flynn was his lies about his work with Turkey under the auspices of the Flynn Intel Group. That was flat out wrong. Yet, that is ignored by the media. They want the Russia silver bullet.

Guess what? There ain't one.

Not one of the things outlined in the Mueller complaint was illegal nor immoral with respect to contacts with Russia. In fact, the sequence of events and Flynn's role provides direct evidence that the senior Trump team had no established contacts with Russia. If they did, why the hell did they rely on Flynn to persuade the Russian government to do or not do things if Trump and his family were already on the Kremlin hook? Makes no sense whatsoever.

I do not know why Flynn lied to the FBI. Shame on him for that. He has dishonored himself and the uniform he once wore. 

We will find out in the coming days if Jared Kushner is as big a fool as Flynn. If JK told the FBI the truth about the events that unfolded between 21 and 31 December then he is off the hook. If he lied, he could be facing charges. One big difference, though. He can afford big time lawyers and beat the Mueller team to shit in the courtroom.

 

Comments

[LondonBob]

This was always a fishing trip for a process crime. They should have known better, as should the Russian amabassador with his mobile phone. Daft.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-michael-flynns-guilty-plea-implicates-israeli-intelligence-and-perhaps-the-logan-act/article/2642278

The Israeli angle seems interesting.

[Grazhdanochka]

Flynns Lies seem to be about as deep as this Well necessarily goes...

Of course a Man spooked could feel pressure to say anything he feels is wanted of him, but I cannot judge his Character on this as yet.

Why he did it? Could be any Number of things - From basis of Political Climate, a moments Poor Decision, overall Dishonesty or something else (Carrying Water?)

What is notable though is the obviousness that any 'Collusion' with Russia were it some deep seated Plot would not require these Communiques back and forth that only draw Attention. It would be understood in advance what largely each Actors intents and Plans are)

This is the Equivalent of Doenitz requiring U-Boats to make regular Reports back to Base with obvious Consequences that came.... and believe me this Lesson is understood by those who need to )

[Fredw]

These charges are of course the end result of a plea bargain. They are not anything like a maximum of what could be proved. Their content in no way indicates a lack of evidence about other matters.

Yes he lied about things that he didn't need to lie about. But to think that exonerates him requires that we take the charges at face value - that we believe that is all there is to it. That is actually possible, but I certainly would not risk any money on it.

This seem so obvious as to not need saying, but apparently it does need to be said.

[Cold War Zoomie]

Seems to me that communicating with foreign ambassadors before taking office is not a minor issue, although it might not be illegal. Obama was still the president and his State Department was handling foreign policy.

"Pre-inaugural meetings between representatives of the incoming administration and foreign diplomats or leaders should be sharply limited. They should be confined to a few persons, clearly authorized by letter from the president-elect or the secretary of state-designate, to speak for the incoming administration. These discussions may be for the educational purpose of allowing new officials to inform themselves about the problems they will face. There should be substantive talks that will allow the new administration to act immediately upon taking office. In either case, the incumbent administration should be kept informed to the extent possible. Nothing should give the impression that the president-elect has any authority to act before the inauguration or interfere with ongoing actions by the incumbent administration."

http://web1.millercenter.org/commissions/comm_1986.pdf

[Publius Tacitus]

Well Fred, you probably need to watch more of the Judicial/Cop shows that you are drawing on to profess expertise in these matters. Your ignorance is laughable. For starters, in a plea agreement like this the prosecutor does not, i repeat, NOT exclude other, more damning evidence. Why? Because the agreement hinges on the defendant admitting to certain key facts. If those facts are not in the agreement then the defendant is not admitting. Which means the prosecutor has no leverage over the defendant.
Really, if you cannot be smart about this stuff just stay silent.

[jdledell]

PT - With all due respect, I think your conclusion that Trump and other high ranking officials are in the clear is way too premature. This relatively minor indictment of Flynn is not conclusive of the total amount of information he has relayed to Mueller's team. The liberals are rightfully castigated for jumping to conclusions on Trump's potential liability, we should not jump to conclusions in the other direction.

[Publius Tacitus]

This is nonsense. That's why we have elections. In any event, Trump and his team did nothing to undermine Obama. To the contrary. It was Obama who unleashed the intel community to interfere in the US election. That's the story.

[Publius Tacitus]

JDLEDELL,
Deal with facts rather than your opinion. If Trump and his senior advisors had actually been "colluding" with the Russians then they would have had lines of communication and points of contact. They would not have to rely on Mike Flynn and Ambassador Kislyak playing telephone tag.
ZERO evidence of the other RUSSIAN ties. ZERO!!!

[Alves]

That is kind of a convoluted reasoning.

It is a BARGAIN. Both sides do a risk assessment. The prosecution can make a deal for any number of reasons, among them the possibility that it could not even get a guilty verdict in the first place.

[jdledell]

PT - I think your reply to Fredw is way out of line. Many of us come here to learn, and being told to shut up is not conducive to discussions and learning.

[Publius Tacitus]

Then Fredw should avoid asserting "facts" that are completely wrong. He is neither a lawyer nor prosecutor and has zero experience in these matters. If he did, he would not have written something so patently foolish and ill-informed. I reiterate the advice of Mark Twain, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool then open one's mouth and remove all doubt.

[Fredw]

This document is a charge sheet and a guilty plea. It does not address other matters and does not rule out other charges. If there is an agreement document, this is not it. And of course the prosecutor does not publish all the things he knows about other people who may also be subject to charges. That would be ridiculous. As Flynn noted in his signed statement: "The preceding is a summary, made for the purpose of providing the Court with a factual basis for my guilty plea to the charge against me. It does not include all of the facts known to me regarding this offense."

[Richardstevenhack]

Alexander Mercouris does his usual excellent analysis at what really lies behind the Flynn charges...

The case against Michael Flynn: Lying to the FBI about asking Russia’s help to protect Israel (full analysis of indictment and Flynn’s guilty plea)

Botched attempt by Kushner and Flynn to block UN SC Resolution 2334 on status of Jerusalem lies behind case against Flynn

http://theduran.com/michael-flynn-lying-fbi-russias-help-israel/

Quote

My guess is that over the next couple of weeks the focus of Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation will increasingly become Kushner. Doubtless it will be about his dealings with Kushner that Mueller will be asking Flynn questions, with Mueller wanting to know how and why Kushner came up with his cack-brained idea of asking the Russians to block Resolution 2334.

However there is no evidence of any illegal collusion by Kushner with the Russians either before the election or after it, and it bears repeating that everything that has been discussed in this article and which has arisen from Flynn’s guilty plea and indictment happened after the election. It cannot therefore have any bearing on the Russiagate collusion case against the Trump campaign, or the claims that the Russians meddled in the election to help Donald Trump. On the contrary, the fact that the Russians turned down Kushner’s and Flynn’s suggestion that they act to block Resolution 2334 if anything argues the opposite.

End Quote

[Eric Newhill]

CWZ,
Have you forgotten that on Nov. 18. 2008, President elect Obama starting calling and meeting with foreign leaders; even the head of the Palestinian Authority. Do you imagine that they were just talking about the weather?

I don't know what is normal and customary, but I do know that Obama was setting up foreign state connections right after being elected.

In that light, what Flynn/Trump admin did seems like a smart thing to do given the new direction that Trump wanted to take and that Obama was trying to scuttle.

All else is anti-Trump crusading. Mueller's got diddly.

[ex-PFC Chuck]

Bob Parry at Consortium News has a piece up that focuses on the civil rights abuse aspect of the investigation and indictment, and how we should all be worried about the precedents being set by it.

In other words, the Justice Department wasn’t seeking information about what Flynn said to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak – the intelligence agencies already had that information. Instead, Flynn was being quizzed on his precise recollection of the conversations and nailed for lying when his recollections deviated from the transcripts.

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/01/the-scalp-taking-of-gen-flynn/

[jpb]

Jared Kushner apparently ordered General Flynn to initiate contact with Russia. It is likely Jared Kushner told the FBI he ordered General Flynn to contact Russia and General Flynn lied about the contact. This gave Mueller the 'head shot' to indict General Flynn. I agree with Publius Tacitus that this goes no where. It is unfortunate that General Flynn made a mistake talking to the FBI. No one should talk to the FBI without consulting a criminal attorney to avoid the 'process law' used to trap otherwise honest and honorable men.

[Fredw]

I should just let this go, but I don't see myself as asserting "facts". I am asserting the absence of facts. I have now read the documents several more times. They are very narrowly tailored to a small set of incidents of no great importance, though many may find them annoying. If that were all they had, there would be no point to a guilty plea that burns his bridges to pwoerful people who have supported him so far. Conviction would take a while and would produce a short prison term and a probable pardon.

And come on! We are talking about lying. The height of the man's career was spent in intelligence. Not an environment that promotes a rigid culture of truth telling or rule following. This was pretty much business as usual. A conviction for lying would have precisely zero effect on anyone's opinion of him.

So I am pretty sure there are "facts" out there that we don't have. The whole thing doesn't make sense with just the facts we do have. I don't know what those "facts" are and I don't claim to. I actually agree with you that the whole "collusion" thing has been blown out of proportion. But it seems clear some powerful people are scared to death of whatever is out there. Which is another way of knowing that there is something important to find out.

[Jonathan House MD]

It does seem that what Fredw and jdledell are saying is also being said by former federal prosecutors. Of course that doesn't mean they are correct, but it is not clear why you think the notion is foolish that the plea to a minor felony could be part of a bargain that entails informing about other offenses by other people. More important offenses and/or more important people.

Here's an excerpt from a left-wing site, Talking Points Memo: those quoted are said to have expertise and/or experience in these matters:
...
"Former federal prosecutors told TPM that Special Counsel Robert Mueller made a calculated move to keep Flynn’s charge limited, and that,… they wouldn’t have done so unless the former intelligence official had divulged some very juicy secrets.
.
“What’s interesting to me is what he’s not charged with,” said Steven Miller, a former anti-corruption federal prosecutor. “This is a very narrowly drawn structural plea bargain. By virtue of a single count he can’t get more than a five-year sentence. You don’t get that unless you’re giving something serious to the government. And the number of players left are relatively small: it’s [Jared] Kushner, it’s [Donald] Trump Jr., it’s the Trump campaign, and it’s the President. So I think this is something that would cause all of them to be extraordinarily worried.”
…
Jens Ohlin, an expert in criminal law at Cornell Law School, concurred, saying what essentially amounts to a “sweetheart deal” would not be offered unless Flynn could incriminate a bigger fish. “The government would not agree to this deal if Flynn was merely providing information on someone who is in a peripheral place in the criminality,” Ohlin said. “So if he’s providing information in exchange for this deal it’s because it’s [the information is about] someone who is even more centrally located than Flynn.”
…
Former prosecutors say that Flynn must have entered into a proffer … agreement with Mueller’s team in which he divulged every detail he knew relevant to their investigation. The government found the information sufficiently valuable that they agreed to strike a deal, despite Flynn’s undisclosed lobbying on behalf of Turkey and reported discussions about spiriting an exiled Muslim cleric loathed by Turkey’s government out of the U.S.
The decision not to include a violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act for his Turkey lobbying or other possible charges in Flynn’s plea agreement is not as unusual as it may seem. “They have discretion to do whatever they want,” Seetha Ramachandran, a former Justice Department official and assistant U.S. attorney said of federal prosecutors. “The practice really varies between different federal districts. Some U.S. attorneys’ offices and parts of [Main] Justice want a cooperator to plead guilty to everything they’ve ever done. Some use a more bare-bones type of guilty plea. So I think it really varies. He’s chosen this strategy.”
…
“I think this is the tip of the iceberg,” said Steve Vladeck, a national security expert at the University of Texas School of Law. “The question is whether we’re going to start hearing stuff from Flynn’s camp about what he’s sharing with investigators, whether we’re going to see more movement, more indictments coming down in the next couple of weeks from Mueller. The real story of today is that there’s a guarantee that there’s big news coming down the pike.”

This way of thinking may be wrong but the reasoning does not seem tendentious to me.

[Larry Kart]

You think Mueller is stupid? Flynn is cooperating -- i.e. he has already given or is going to give Mueller what Mueller thinks he needs to proceed, otherwise this deal would never been agreed to. Further, it's almost certainly not about collusion anymore but about obstruction of justice. Deal with facts, yes, but why do you think that what's visible to us right now are all the facts that eventually will be revealed?

[blue peacock]

It seems from the Flynn plea deal that the Trump team was colluding with Israel and NOT the Russians.

Will Mueller investigate this collusion or is he just gonna focus on a few easy scalps?

Manafort has been indicted for money laundering from our Ukrainian "friends" and Flynn has accepted lying to the FBI under oath. Nothing yet that sheds any light on the original accusations and media hysteria of how Putin stole the election from Saint Hillary.

[SR Wood]

I think you are an apologist for the Trumpster and I think we have to wait for Mueller's investigation to play out before spouting conclusions. After all, he's only been at it for a couple of months. How long did it take to get the full story on Nixon?

[notlurking]

Does anybody remember Manafort...who?.....next

[Babak Makkinejad]

No, as long as ths said Ambassador is not that of the Russian Federation.

[jpb]

No,it was Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak who requested Flynn call the Trump team to find out their views on the Obama sanctions...https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/01/the-scalp-taking-of-gen-flynn/

[blue peacock]

It is quite possible that Flynn did the plea deal because he may not have had the money for the long legal battle in a trial.

The fact that in this deal the DoJ has only confirmed that he was not entirely accurate in his recollection of his conversations shows that this could be just a witch hunt. There are no accusations of substantial violations of the law.

What if the FBI interviewed Mueller himself on his investigation of UraniumOne, would he face the same charges if his recollection was not entirely perfect? This whole Mueller investigation seems to be to get some indictments of those in Trump's orbit while forgetting about the original reason why he was appointed in the first place as special counsel.