Thread by @marty_lederman

Yes, of course Michael Flynn committed the offense to which he twice pleaded guilty: He knowingly & willfully told FBI officials material falsehoods on 01/24/17. And more recently he lied to the court when he insisted that he didn't knowingly lie in 01/17. HOWEVER ... /1

... those lies/offenses aren't as significant, IMHO--sometimes not nearly as much--as a dozen and a half or so other things that've happened in the Flynn saga, some of which are far more troubling than Flynn's lies and most of which are *not* criminal offenses.

For example:

/2

(i) Flynn's secret conversations w/Kislyak in Dec. 2017.

(ii) Flynn's efforts to undermine U.S. foreign policy in those calls.

(iii) Flynn's & Trump's indifference to Russia's efforts to alter the U.S. election--and their signals to Putin that they didn't much care. /3

(iv) Trump's directive to Flynn that he had to "kill the story" of what he'd said to Kislyak.

(v) Flynn's lies to Pence, Priebus & Spicer about what he'd done, which induced those officials to construct a false public narrative about the communications. /4

(vi) K.T. McFarland's knowing effort to convey that same false public narrative.

(vii) FBI Director Comey's insubordination in directing officers to interview NS Advisor Flynn w/o telling Acting AG Yates and in disregard of her decision to tell Trump/McGahn. /5

(viii) The leaks of classified info about the Kislyak calls to the Washington Post in Jan./Feb. 2017.

(ix) Trump's effort to shake down Comey to drop the Flynn investigation. /6

(x) Trump's effort to have McFarland draft an internal email that would “confirm” that Trump hadn't directed Flynn to discuss sanctions w/Kislyak.

(xi) Flynn's FARA violations in March 2017, and his broader work on Turkey's behalf, incl. his efforts ... /7

... to discredit a dissident Turkish cleric living in the U.S. (Fethullah Gulen).

(xii) AG Barr's decision to move to dismiss the charge against Flynn.

(xiii) Barr's effort to establish a narrative that Flynn's calls with Kislyak were appropriate and even "laudable." /8

(xiv) Barr's/DOJ's argument that the FBI had no legitimate reason to be investigating Flynn in Jan. 2017.

(xv) DOJ's current contention that there’s insufficient evidence to prove Flynn willfully lied to the FBI. /9

(xvi) DOJ's current argument that a lie to the FBI isn't "material" (& thus unlawful) unless it's reasonably likely to influence the Bureau's decision-making or that the falsehood was "objectively significant" to the investigation--an argument that misrepresents the law. /10

(xvii) The SG's argument that the court of appeals should prematurely grant an extraordinary writ of mandamus directing the district court to permit the government to dismiss the charge--an argument that has no serious legal basis.

and ... /11

(xviii) The SG's representation to the court of appeals that there's a DOJ policy (there's not) that prosecutors must move to withdraw charges *to which defendants have pleaded guilty* if they believe the admissible evidence is insufficient to obtain a jury verdict. /12

Obviously, some of these are far more troubling than others, but Flynn's lies--and whether he's convicted--are relatively minor in the grand scheme of things. /12

Much more on all of these in a pair of posts:

justsecurity.org/70431/understa…

justsecurity.org/70656/four-rem…