Many misunderstand the Flynn case because they don’t know the difference between counterintelligence and law enforcement.
Flynn was in big counterintel trouble, and got to plead guilty to a small criminal charge because he gave info to help FBI/Mueller counterintel investigation.
Michael Flynn’s defenders and apologists, from Glenn Greenwald to QAnon, elide the counterintelligence-law enforcement distinction, acting as if the only thing Flynn did wrong was lie to the FBI.
But the lying charge—which he pled guilty to multiple times—was the sweetheart deal.
To everyone asking if Flynn broke a deal by withdrawing his guilty plea and can now be charged for other things, I think that also confuses counterintel and law enforcement.
Info from Flynn is in the Mueller report. He gave something of value, so his CI deal is likely intact.
Flynn stopped cooperating, refusing to help the law enforcement part (eg providing sworn testimony against someone higher up) and maybe even undermining it. That's why he got charged for lying to investigators. If Flynn had kept cooperating he would've faced no legal punishment.
I understand why many are frustrated with the law enforcement part of Mueller's investigation. Some Trump figures likely dodged accountability.
But the counterintelligence part was more important. We had to understand Russia's anti-US intel op. It'll be a key case study for years
Flynn gave FBI/Mueller some info they found useful, which is likely why they didn't go after him for failing to register as a foreign agent (among other things), or his son for alleged involvement in the Gulen kidnapping plot.
That's the counterintelligence deal. Appears intact.
I don't have access to the redacted parts of the Mueller report, nor do I know what info they acquired that didn't end up in the report.
But if you think it was a mistake for the counterintelligence investigation to trade for Flynn's info, I think that's hindsight bias.
Flynn is not a victim. He did things that hurt the country, things he surely knew were illegal, unethical, unpatriotic.
The way he’s been QAnoned into a hero is weird fan fiction. And some who know better play along by eliding the CI-LE distinction.
Pardoning him is a disgrace.
FBI certainly isn’t above criticism, but this strikes me as minor in the full Flynn context.
Most claims of “bad behavior” ignore the counterintel part.
If you start by recognizing that they let Flynn (and son) out of a lot before any legal pressure re: lying, it looks different.
Rubio spent four years excusing, defending, apologizing for, and protecting the biggest cause of America's global decline.
Relative decline for a unipolar power is inevitable. But it didn't have to be this fast, with US stupidly throwing away so much influence, from TPP to COVID.
Trump, Kushner, Pompeo, Esper, Barr, Mnuchin and other top admin officials went to Ivy League schools.
Clearly, where top officials went to school is not a good predictor of how they'll perform in office.
Rubio knows this. He just thinks faux populism will appeal to his audience.
US had TPP, the world's largest trading bloc, including a variety of Pacific Rim countries but excluding China. A great geopolitical move.
Trump bailed for no good reason, failed to get bilateral trade deals, and now there's a new world's largest trading bloc with China but no US
Abrams acknowledged her loss, though maintained it was unfair, so she's already ahead of where GOP is now.
Her opponent was the official who oversees Georgia elections. He purged 340k voters from the rolls, many of them black. Abrams lost by <55k.
What's the equivalent in 2020?
After a successful lawsuit forced Georgia's now-governor Brian Kemp to release a list of purged voters, analysis revealed Kemp claimed thousands of voters he purged had moved out of the state, except they hadn't.
What's the equivalent evidence re: 2020? rollingstone.com/politics/polit…
I know that "whatabout Stacey Abrams?" is a go-to move for people looking to excuse Trump's behavior, but we've never seen evidence-free claims of mass fraud and refusal to acknowledge results before.
The weakness of this whatabout highlights how abnormal that Trumpist claim is.
Good time to reup my article about the big flaw in conspiracy theories: human beings mess up all the time.
But when you actually think through what it'd take for these plots to be true, hundreds even thousands of people must exhibit a superhuman competence arcdigital.media/the-human-fall…
9/11 conspiracy theories require Twin Towers maintenance and security workers to have never noticed anything, or to all be in on it. The NYPD, FDNY, and various federal agents too. And all of them executed it perfectly, leaving no evidence, and all kept quiet for years.
Come on.
The alleged mass voter fraud conspiracies would need hundreds of thousands of fake ballots, which would take thousands of people to execute the scheme in various locations. Such a thing would leave tons of easily apparent evidence.
Remember, we're talking about human beings here.
False. There's no standard by which Trump didn't "get us into any new wars" that doesn't also apply to Obama.
Both did drone strikes. Both added troops to some ongoing conflicts and withdrew some others. Both bombed regime targets in a new country but didn't invade (Libya, Syria)
Trump also generated greater confrontation with Iran by scrapping JCPOA without cause and bombed an Iran government target, Soleimani, the first military commander of a foreign state the US killed since WWII. In response, Iran bombed a US military target for the first time ever.
I've heard from various types of people that Trump is the first POTUS in a while not to start any new wars, or was more generally anti-war, and it's false. Some are lying, many are just misguided, but either way, it's wrong.
And yet, this inaccurate claim seems likely to persist.
The main reason DHS and other US gov security agencies consider white supremacists a threat is that white supremacist terrorists have killed more Americans in recent years than any other type of terrorist (see the El Paso Walmart shooting, the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, more)
Pittsburgh synagogue shooting was white supremacist because the terrorist targeted Jews because a Jewish org helped resettle Middle Eastern refugees.
El Paso shooting was because the terrorist targeted Latinos to defend whites from the "great replacement" of nonwhite immigration.
.@ConceptualJames doesn't understand terrorism, nor how terrorist analysts classify some attacks as white supremacist.
By fixating on personal bugaboos, he's effectively apologizing for white supremacist terrorism.
And that's the charitable interpretation.
The argument here is it was totally unfair that the sitting administration's top foreign policy, national security, and law enforcement officials found out who was conducting secret conversations with Russia's ambassador about undermining the administration's foreign policy.
Try thinking it through:
US intelligence is monitoring Russia's ambassador--of course they are, not least because he's known to be involved with Russian intelligence--and catch him talking to an American about undermining US foreign policy. So they have to... willfully ignore it?
Logan Act stuff is silly. Incoming officials reaching out to foreign counterparts is fine.
But US officials knew Russia conducted a big intel op against the US, and knew this convo with Kislyak was hidden from the US gov. Not finding out who it was would be a dereliction of duty.