Russian Connection 4: Do Not Congratulate

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

 Roger is insinuating that Mueller is going to frame an innocent man.

[Howl]

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

 Roger is insinuating that Mueller is going to frame an innocent man.

I could think of a lot of words to describe Roger Stone, but innocent, as a specific or a more general category, is not one of them. 

[AmazonGrace]

Rudolph Says Stuff - A play in two acts: 

 

 

[Howl]

Why am I not surprised?  This is a clear example of setting up a narrative to create fake truth out of a lie. SOP for these guys. Sadly, because of the Faux propaganda machine, it's too often a successful strategy.  The entire Trump machine is fueled by it. 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Michael Flynn pleaded guilty. Now his supporters are trying to exonerate him."

Spoiler

Hashtags. Tweets. Speeches. A book foreword.

Friends and family of former national security adviser Michael Flynn are waging a campaign to try to exonerate the retired lieutenant general — and, possibly, land him a presidential pardon.

The push comes as Flynn himself — who in December pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak — is also trying to rehabilitate his public image, including appearing with a long-shot Republican House candidate, delivering a private foreign policy speech in Manhattan and writing the foreword to a friend’s self-published manifesto supporting President Trump. 

But the largely social-media-based effort has, at times, put Flynn’s advocates, and occasionally Flynn, at odds with his own legal team, which believes that any public attention to Flynn’s case is not helpful as he awaits sentencing and has counseled that he and his family to remain quiet.

In December, for instance, one of Flynn’s brothers, Joseph Flynn, posted a tweet urging the president to pardon his former adviser. “About time you pardoned General Flynn who has taken the biggest fall for all of you given the illegitimacy of this confessed crime in the wake of all this corruption,” he wrote.

But the missive raised concerns among Flynn’s legal team at Covington & Burling — where Flynn’s lawyer, Robert Kelner works — and shortly thereafter Joseph Flynn deleted the tweet and replaced it with a more respectful plea on his brother’s behalf.

Flynn was also approached, at one point, with a lucrative offer to write a book, but declined after discussing the idea with his legal team.

Kelner, who declined to comment, has urged Flynn to keep a low profile and to not comment on the case, a Flynn confidant said, with the goal of avoiding a prison sentence and placating special counsel Robert S. Mueller III.

“Strictly speaking, a family member doesn’t necessarily implicate the person who has pleaded guilty,” said Barak Cohen, the litigation lead for Perkins Coie. “But prosecutors, for better or worse, are human beings. If they think someone is saying something that undercuts the guilty plea, that could have a negative consequence for the defendant.”

Flynn was one of the first Trump associates to plead guilty in Mueller’s probe of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, and he began cooperating with the ongoing investigation. He was initially fired from his top White House post in February 2017, after misleading Vice President Pence about his contacts with Kislyak.

But since his West Wing departure and guilty plea, Flynn has become something of a cause celebre among the conservative right and a symbol of what the president’s most ardent supporters contend is a conspiracy to undermine his administration by law enforcement and intelligence officials hostile to his presidency.

While the defense of the retired general started on the fringes of the president’s support network, the Flynn exoneration movement has picked up steam in recent weeks. His advocates have seized on recent comments by former FBI director James B. Comey during his book tour that he doesn’t recall telling lawmakers that FBI agents did not think Flynn was lying intentionally when he was first interviewed about his conversation with Kislyak.

Their effort got a boost earlier this month when Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) took issue with Comey’s statement in a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, who is overseeing the Russia probe, and FBI Director Christopher A. Wray.

Grassley wrote that when Comey met with committee members on March 15, 2017, “Comey led us to believe during that briefing that the agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe he intentionally lied about his conversation with the Ambassador and that the Justice Department was unlikely to prosecute him for false statements made in that interview.”

“In the months since then,” Grassley added, “the Special Counsel obtained a guilty plea from Lt. General Flynn for that precise alleged conduct.”

The Wall Street Journal editorial board chimed in two days later, writing: “The question is whether special counsel Robert S. Mueller III pressured him to plead to a crime he didn’t commit.”

While Flynn’s supporters have focused on his guilty plea regarding lying to the FBI, the special counsel’s office made clear in a court filing at the time that he was also being investigated for other possible crimes before the deal was struck, including improperly lobbying for Turkey.

The White House has taken a mixed stance toward Flynn. Trump has expressed solidarity with him, both publicly and privately. In a tweet last month, his most recent to mention Flynn, he lamented his former adviser’s life being “totally destroyed.”

But at one point late last year, when it looked as though Flynn might accuse Trump or people close to the president of possible wrongdoing, the president’s own legal team readied an attack on his credibility. And many White House aides have privately expressed little sympathy for him, saying choosing Flynn for the top national security post was a mistake from the very beginning. The president, at times, has also called the general “very controversial,” according to a senior administration official.

Trump has not publicly ruled out pardoning Flynn. “I don’t want to talk about pardons for Michael Flynn yet,” the president told reporters in December. “We’ll see what happens.” 

As the investigation heated up in 2017, John Dowd, who until recently was one of Trump’s personal lawyers, floated the idea of pardons to lawyers for both Flynn and Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager who Mueller indicted — calls that startled their respective counsels. Trump has also occasionally asked advisers in the West Wing about pardons.

One Trump confidant envisioned a scenario where — if the president is vindicated by the result of Mueller’s probe — he might issue across-the-board pardons to all his former campaign aides entangled in the special counsel’s tentacles. 

Barry Bennett, a former Trump campaign aide, offered a similar analysis. “I think if the investigation turns up zero, there is a chance everyone gets pardoned, just to make a point,” he said.

Despite warnings from Flynn’s lawyers, some of his allies and family members have persisted. At one time, Mueller’s investigators warned Flynn’s lawyers that they planned to indict him and also could charge his son, Michael Flynn Jr. — and many believe Flynn’s decision to take a plea deal and cooperate with the probe was driven by his desire to protect his son.

Flynn Jr. has denied this was a motivation for his father and remains an active presence on social media, often sending missives defending the elder Flynn and questioning Mueller’s team investigation.

“Is it not possible he just plead guilty because of the financial burden it created and is creating on our family??” Flynn Jr. wrote in one tweet.

In another, he both chastised the media and contradicted the White House’s official version of events — that Flynn was fired for misleading Pence — in writing that his father never lied. “W everything going on during the transition, isnt possible that it was a miscommunication btw 2 people that couldve been resolved w/o all the media hoopla?” he wrote. 

Pasquale Scopelliti, a self-described business coach in Charlottesville who befriended Flynn during the 2016 campaign, is helping lead a social media effort to clear Flynn’s name. Flynn wrote the foreword to an e-book, “The MAGA Manifesto,” being self-published by Scopelliti

Scopelliti is still pushing for a pardon but noted that Flynn’s brother, who was initially engaged in the idea, seems to have backed off the idea slightly.

“I think he realized it was maybe not the best option,” Scopelliti said. “I don’t believe the family takes a position on it now.” 

The campaign to repair Flynn’s reputation has thrust the former national security adviser — at times willingly — into the spotlight. In March, when Flynn appeared in La Quinta, Calif., to endorse Omar Navarro, a 29-year-old Republican hoping to defeat 14-term Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) in a largely Democratic district, he seemed to obliquely refer to his current legal morass. 

“I’m not here to complain about who has done me wrong or how unfair I’ve been treated or how unfair the entire process has been,” Flynn said. “It is what it is, and my previous statements can stand for themselves.”

Joseph Flynn, meanwhile, described his brother’s plea deal as necessary after an arduous and expensive process — and said it would end a difficult chapter to an otherwise remarkable life of military service.

 Still, Joseph Flynn stressed that his statements should not be seen as representing his brother’s opinion. He added that his brother does not divulge details of his legal strategy with him.  

“We do not discuss his legal case,” Joseph Flynn said, referring his brother. “There was no conspiracy among the Flynns about a pardon.” One of the lawyers, who also represented a person in the Mueller investigation and talks to Kelner occasionally, spoke of the situation with something close to wonder: “If Michael Flynn gets out of this with no prison, it would be a remarkable thing.”  

Among the fellow lawyers in the case, Kelner’s handling of the Flynn matter has been viewed as “somewhat remarkable,” according to one. Long before Flynn was indicted, two of the lawyers said, it was all but a preordained conclusion in Washington legal circles that he would face charges and, potentially, a long prison sentence. Now, some think Flynn might escape any jail time at all.

But the idea of a pardon idea still looms large. Earlier this year, Eric Holder, former attorney general under President Barack Obama and a partner at Kelner’s firm, spoke out against Trump’s pardon for Joe Arpaio, the controversial former sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz. 

“It was a misuse of the process,” Holder said, in comments that seemed designed to apply both to Arpaio’s specific case, but also to the prospect of a future pardon for his law partner’s client — Flynn. 

 

[fraurosena]

Seth Abramson's latest mega-thread. I haven't read it yet, but at first glance it's promising to be rather interesting reading.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Awww, the RNC is helping Hopey: "RNC paid nearly half a million dollars to law firm representing Hope Hicks and others in Russia probes"

Spoiler

The Republican National Committee paid nearly half a million dollars to a law firm that represents former White House communications director Hope Hicks and others in the Russia investigations, according to a new federal filing.

The RNC's $451,780 payment to Trout Cacheris & Janis adds to the mounting legal fees associated with the investigations by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and several congressional committees of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.

Hicks hired Robert Trout, founder of the law firm, as her personal attorney in September, according to news reports. The report of the payments for legal and compliance services, contained in the Federal Election Commission report filed Sunday, is the first public disclosure of RNC payments to the law firm since Hicks hired Trout.

Three lawyers at the firm represent people in addition to Hicks in the investigations by Mueller and the House and Senate intelligence committees, according to the firm's website. Hicks, who was one of President Trump's most trusted and loyal aides, was interviewed by Mueller and the House and Senate intelligence panels in early 2018.

Hicks resigned from her White House position in February, and her last day was in March.

Last year, the RNC began tapping a pool of money stockpiled for election recounts and other legal matters to pay the ballooning legal fees of Trump and his associates drawn into the Russia investigations.

Some party officials thought it would be more appropriate to create a separate legal defense fund for the case, The Washington Post reported last year. But RNC officials concluded that it is permissible for the party to pay for the president's legal fees. At the time, party and administration officials were working to determine whether executive branch staff members, who must comply with gift rules, could have their legal fees defrayed by the RNC or private legal defense funds.

A legal defense fund was created in February to help defray the costs faced by Trump's aides who are drawn into the Russia investigations. But it is unclear whether the fund has received or paid any money, as it has not publicly disclosed any information about donations or spending.

A spokesperson for the RNC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The RNC continued to post strong fundraising figures in April, raising $12.7 million, for a total of $173.9 million in the 2018 cycle and $43.8 million in cash on hand, the filing shows.

The Democratic National Committee raised $7.8 million in April, for a total of $92.2 million for the 2018 cycle. The DNC had $8.7 million in cash on hand and $5.3 million in debt.

But the main outside groups supporting Democratic congressional candidates outraised their GOP counterparts in April. The two Democratic super PACs supporting congressional candidates in the midterm elections raised a total of $11.2 million, compared with $6 million by the two main Republican super PACs, according to reports filed Sunday and earlier this month.

Among the six-figure donors to the Senate Majority PAC, which supports Senate Democrats, were actor and producer Seth MacFarlane, who gave $2 million; Cynthia Simon-Skjodt, a philanthropist and daughter of the Simon Property Group founder, who gave $1 million; and Bay Area real estate developer George Marcus, who gave $1 million.

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

An excellent op-ed: "Mueller has no room for mistakes"

Spoiler

The most difficult and the most important jobs in America are one and the same, and they belong to Robert Swan Mueller III.

Washington is obsessed with the question of when the job will be finished. But that matters little alongside how the job is done. The special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election — and such matters as arise from that investigation — is walking a tightrope over an abyss, buffeted by partisan and cynical winds from all directions. The country needs him to deliver, at the end of his perilous crossing, an account of his findings that is fair-minded, transparent, sober and unassailable.

This is no time to rush.

Mueller’s task is to bolster the good faith of the 60 to 70 percent of Americans who think with their own brains rather than outsourcing their thinking to right- or left-wing propagandists. But don’t kid yourselves. Just because this tenuous majority is willing to think does not mean its components all think the same way. Some of them will be disappointed with anything short of an indictment of the president or a road map to impeachment. Others will be wary of anything less than a complete exoneration of President Trump.

Success for Mueller will be measured by his ability to speak credibly to both ends of that spectrum and to everyone in between. Every American who has not yet been seduced into one political cult or another must be able to look at his completed work and see that no punches were pulled, nor any low blows landed. Mistakes or missteps by his investigators must be acknowledged and explained. Mueller must account for all the doors he opened, as well as any he leaves shut. Though not everyone will agree with every conclusion or action, we must have sufficient truthful information to understand and evaluate them all.

The list of people who have made Mueller’s job more difficult is long and spans all parties. The right-wing conspiracy machine is the loudest and most obvious offender, led by the tweeting Trump. But the fodder for those supposed conspiracies was planted and fertilized by the likes of Hillary and Bill Clinton, whose inflated sense of themselves spawned years of rule-skirting and buck-raking; by former attorney general Loretta Lynch, who foolishly answered her airplane door when the aforementioned former president came knocking; by the bumbling Clouseaus atop the FBI, whose protests of impartiality ring hollow when they appear to be up to their elbows in politics.

Truth be told, Mueller made his own task more difficult by recruiting lawyers to assist him without sufficient concern for their political ties. Admittedly, it’s difficult to practice law at high levels in the United States without compiling a record of political donations. Yet when so many of those donations went to Democrats, we can’t blame Republicans for casting a gimlet eye.

Nor is it fair to expect Republicans to ignore the whiplash of hypocrisy that preceded Mueller’s appointment. On Oct. 19, 2016, during the final debate of the campaign, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton attacked Trump for refusing to pledge that he would respect the vote totals. “That is not the way our democracy works,” she insisted. “We’ve been around for 240 years. We’ve had free and fair elections. We’ve accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them, and that is what must be expected of anyone standing on a debate stage.”

Then came November, and a giant Emily Litella moment for stunned Democrats: Never mind.

So much depends on Robert Mueller.

The United States has been the luckiest of nations, in that we get the servants we need when we need them most. We got George Washington when we needed a hero willing to relinquish power after gaining and wielding it. We got Abraham Lincoln when we needed a cunning poet to steel the nation to sacrifice and make that sacrifice meaningful. When the wrecked world needed order, we got Harry Truman with his stoutly ordered mind.

What we need now, desperately, is an honest broker.

Mueller is, like all human beings, capable of mistakes. But he is also capable of selfless public service that can be admired from many points on the political spectrum. Indeed, a headline on the Fox News website on the day he was named special counsel read: “Robert Mueller appointment to lead Russia probe wins bipartisan praise.”

As the capstone of his career, Mueller faces a task with no room for mistakes. When the time comes, when he’s good and ready, he must give his country a full accounting of his work and his findings without fear or favor. For even in the storm of deception and dishonesty, truth has a distinctive ring. And given the chance, America’s anxious and unsettled — but patriotic — majority will answer its call.

 

[fraurosena]

Well that sucks for the presidunce. Clovis just punched a great big hole in that conspiracy theory. And on Faux News, no less!

For those of you who don't want to give Faux any clicks:

Quote

A former Trump campaign co-chairman shared details to Fox News on Tuesday night about a meeting he had with an individual who he now believes was an FBI informant.

Sam Clovis spoke out to “Tucker Carlson Tonight” amid reports the alleged FBI informant was in touch with members of the Trump campaign team during the 2016 presidential election.

Clovis told Carlson that prior to the meeting on Sept. 1, 2016, the alleged informant emailed him asking for a sit-down to discuss foreign policy and to share some writings which might help the campaign.

The meeting in Washington D.C. lasted about an hour and the pair discussed the individual’s research “and it mostly was focused on China,” Clovis said.

Weeks later, Clovis told Carlson, he received an email from the alleged informant that contained “several attachments.”

“And I can be honest with you, Tucker, I haven’t even opened those attachments to this day,” Clovis said. “I have no idea what was in them but they were mostly titled, ‘papers that dealt with China.’”

Clovis said he did not know the individual before getting the initial email. He said the alleged informant claimed to know Carter Page, who also was part of Trump’s campaign team.

[video]

It wasn’t until recent reporting that Clovis said he “started to put two and two together.” 

“And then it started to make sense to me,” Clovis said, that the individual may have been “probing to find a weak spot in our campaign.”

“Someone who might be vulnerable to connecting things back to those elusive 30,000 emails that supposedly the Russians had,” Clovis said, adding that he thought the alleged informant’s task was “to create an audit trail back to those emails from someone in the campaign or someone associated with the campaign so that they could develop a stronger case for probable cause to continue to issue warrants and to further an investigation.”

“Because I really felt after hearing all of these other things and listening to the reports that I’ve read, that this truly was an effort to build something that did not exist,” Clovis said.

When Carlson asked Clovis why he never read the email attachments, he replied that he “was busy” and because he “didn’t think that they were going to contribute anything.”

He continued, “I’ve gone back and reviewed all my emails. I didn’t report that meeting to anyone in the campaign so the meeting was of no consequence to me as far as anything I can remember. And I’ve looked through all of my personal emails and everything, and I can’t find a record of it at all.”

Fox News reported earlier Tuesday that the alleged informant spoke with Clovis, in addition to Carter Page and foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulous.

A source told Fox News' John Roberts that Clovis met with the alleged informant, whom he knew to be a professor, and had a conversation related to China. The source told Fox News that Russia did not come up.

The source told Fox News that Clovis received a follow-up email from the individual in the months before the election with research material on China, and another email on the day after the election congratulating the campaign.

 

[Howl]

Gosh, could it be that Sam Clovis is busy covering his rather ample ass? No, no nothing about Russia.  And I NEVER opened those attachments. Nope.  Nope.  I was suspicious from the start.  

[GreyhoundFan]

This is a good analysis: "There is no evidence for ‘Spygate’ — but there is a reason that Trump invented it"

Spoiler

In the grand tradition of Gretchen Wieners, President Trump has a new catchphrase that he is trying on for size.

“Spygate” made its debut on Wednesday morning during Trump’s “executive time,” the period during which he watches “Fox and Friends” before starting his official day. The term is a shorthand meant to refer to a scandal that Trump has insisted is potentially the worst in American history, easily eclipsing Watergate.

Not to dampen his enthusiasm or anything, it’s also a scandal for which there’s no public evidence.

Trump’s claim is that the FBI put a “spy” in his campaign at the behest of Barack Obama’s White House as part of an effort to undercut his candidacy by alleging collusion with the Russians. It’s hard to square that claim with 1) Trump’s repeated insistence that the Russia investigation began only after he won as an excuse for the Democrats’ loss, and 2) the fact that America only learned about the investigation into Russian collusion after voting had already occurred. If Obama and the Democrats put a spy in his campaign to undercut his chances, they made a small strategic error by not mentioning anything publicly before votes were cast. But that’s the claim, because internal consistency is not a requirement for any conspiracy theory, much less this one.

As it stands, the evidence that there was a “spy” — or multiple “spies” — within his campaign is as follows:

1. A professor based in Britain reached out to Trump campaign advisers George Papadopoulos and Carter Page before the election, apparently to evaluate any connections they might have had to Russian actors. The professor also had coffee once with senior adviser Sam Clovis, during which they discussed China.
2. A former adviser, fired in the middle of the campaign, is telling people that he knows of another spy, but hasn’t offered any evidence to that effect.
3. A “lot of people” are saying there were spies in the campaign, per Trump.

There’s overlap between points 3 and 4 above, in that the “lot of people” Trump sees talking about a “spy” in his campaign are mostly people on Fox News like Judge Andrew Napolitano.

Trump’s case really comes down to that first point, that professor emeritus at the University of Cambridge who spoke with Trump staffers. His name, The Post reported this week, is Stefan Halper, and he did indeed contact both Page and Papadopoulos.

The argument that Halper was a spy planted in Trump’s campaign, though, early on suffers from two significant flaws.

The first, as we noted on Tuesday, is that Halper contacted Papadopoulos and Page only after they were already on the FBI’s radar. The FBI had interviewed Page in March; he met Halper in July, after he’d traveled to Moscow. The FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign began in July; Halper’s outreach to Papadopoulos began in September.

The second, of course, is that Halper was never embedded in the campaign. Nor is there any evidence he was ever spying on the campaign. His outreach was to three specific individuals, including Clovis — whose position in the campaign meant that he was a point of contact for both Page and Papadopoulos. It would be a bit like trying to take down the Mob by interviewing street hoods whom you thought you could convict on shoplifting charges.

So that’s all the public evidence, those meetings with a guy who was not in any sense part of Trump’s campaign. That and rumors.

Now, you may be thinking, Well, maybe Trump has seen other evidence that isn’t public. That’s possible, but it is undercut somewhat by the weeks-long fight that’s taken place over whether to reveal Halper’s relationship with the FBI. Why the focus on Halper if there’s better evidence than Halper out there?

This is also an administration that, early in 2017, invited Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) to the White House complex to view classified documents that it believed would help bolster Trump’s off-the-cuff claim about phones at Trump Tower having been wiretapped during the campaign. That “spying” also did not occur, but the White House — or at least White House staffers — had few qualms about sharing material that might help prove it.

The “tapped phones” incident is a good reminder that we’ve seen this dance before: Trump whips up a conspiracy theory out of the ether and uses it to suggest that he is an unfair victim. He’s never been terribly worried about backing up his assertions with facts; his claims about seeing Muslims in New Jersey celebrating the 9/11 attacks come to mind. He learned from that incident that he could make a false claim and that his base would throw up enough scaffolding around it that it could stand on its own. It’s happened time and again, with Trump saying that something that didn’t happen actually did and his allies scrambling for scraps of evidence that suggest it might have.

So now it’s Spygate. As special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe advances toward its conclusion, whatever that might be, the urgency of having Spygates to offset the political risk posed by the Russia investigation increases. “Spygate” is no more robust a theory than “tapped phones”-gate, but it’s more important now because the political stakes are so much higher. Trump will stick with it for a while — unless something else pops up that might be a more effective foil for him or a better way to undercut the legitimacy of the FBI.

That’s really the game, of course: If the FBI is investigating him, then it’s necessary to present as much evidence as possible that the FBI is biased in doing so. Always that need to give people a reason to doubt the negative things being said about him, just like his attacks on the press.

Unlike Gretchen Wieners in “Mean Girls,” Trump can make “Spygate” happen. What he has, that Wieners didn’t, is a constituency of people and television personalities willing and eager to make it happen.

Love the "Mean Girls" references. Sadly, Dumpy can make fetch happen.

[fraurosena]

Michael Flynn Jr. cryptically tweeted that 'you're all going down.' Um, what?

Quote

On Monday afternoon at 4 p.m., Michael Flynn Jr. tweeted this: "You're all going down. You know who you are. Mark my word...."

Which is, um, intriguing?

Flynn is the son of Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump's former national security adviser and now a cooperating witness in special counsel Robert Mueller's probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

You'll remember that Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to Mueller in December, and in announcing his decision, made clear that "my guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the Special Counsel's Office reflect a decision I made in the best interests of my family and of our country."

That guilty plea came just a month after CNN reported that Flynn was growing increasingly concerned about the legal exposure of his son, who served as his de facto aide-de-camp during the campaign and for a portion of the presidential transition.

Even as his father has disappeared from public view since last December's guilty plea, Michael Flynn Jr. has continued to tweet up a storm. And at times, he has seemed to inadvertently(?), contradict the White House's official line on the Russia investigation.

Take this tweet from last month:

"American Patriot @GenFlynn did not lie to Pence (or anyone else in the admin) about his perfectly legal and appropriate conversations w Russian AMB Kislyak in Dec 2016. Why would a highly decorated military intel officer lie about something legal? Been a MSM lie from day 1."

That contention runs directly against the President's stated reason for firing Flynn: Because Flynn lied to Vice President Mike Pence about the nature and number of his contacts with Russian officials.

Flynn Jr. provided no context or follow up as to what evidence (if any) he had to back up his claim that Trump's reasoning for firing his father was false.

That's sort of the way things go for Flynn Jr.'s Twitter feed. There's a lot of boasting and braggadocio and very little in the way of provable facts. Flynn Jr. has touted the belated "#impeachObama" movement, attacked Starbucks and offered this vague warning about Google -- "Google is becoming a dangerous platform.....tread wisely..." -- all in the last 24 hours or so.

It's also worth noting that Flynn Jr. often traffics in debunked conspiracy theories -- including "Pizzagate," the idea that a pizza restaurant in Washington was running a secret pedophile ring that Hillary Clinton was somehow involved in. (Flynn Jr. left the transition team after raising questions about "Pizzagate.")

Which brings me back to Flynn Jr.'s "You're all going down" tweet.

The wording creates lots and lots of questions.

The biggest one is who is the "you" Flynn Jr. is referring to? Is it people within the Trump administration who he thinks have sold his dad out? Is it the alleged "deep state" actors like former FBI Director James Comey, former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe and special counsel Mueller? Someone else?

A quick reading of Flynn Jr.'s other tweets sent around the same time -- and there are lots -- suggests he might be talking about the "deep state" idea. Why? Because, hours later, Flynn Jr. retweeted Sharyl Attkisson's story detailing something called a "sensitive matter team" within the FBI that, according to Attkisson, was tasked with dealing with the Russia investigation.

Which is, I mean ... who knows?

Look. It's easy to dismiss Flynn Jr. as a son looking out for his dad and/or someone prone to see conspiracy everywhere he looks. Maybe that's all this "you're all going down" tweet is -- just another empty boast.

But it's also worth remembering that Flynn Jr. was his father's closest aide. He was, therefore, intimately involved in the Trump campaign and, for a time, the Trump transition. Which mean he knows things. Which makes totally laughing off his latest warning a mistake.

 

[fraurosena]

Mueller, are you listening? He just presented you with even more evidence again.

"And -- excuse me! -- a lot of people are saying it... I did a great service to this country..." 

[fraurosena]

Well looky here. Mueller is asking for preparations for pre-sentence investigation report of Papadopoulos. 

 

[fraurosena]

Here’s a mini thread, explaining why we shouldn’t jump to conclusions about the Papadopolous pre- sentencing.

 

[fraurosena]

If you want to know more about the Mueller investigation, as told by Mueller's office itself, read this little but extremely interesting thread by Brad Heath:

 

[fraurosena]

Seth Abramson has a 22 tweet threadlet about Papadopolous. It has more in depth info that the thread I posted yesterday.

One tweet from the above thread is important to note for everyone anxious for impeachment:

 

[Howl]

We has all your bots! 

Finally, FINALLY some good news about Russia!  Kind of a big dealio.               Exclusive: FBI Seizes Control of Russian Botnet

Not such good news: a detailed deconstruction of the entire Russia information warfare infrastructure.  It's a dry title, but holy crap, there's a lot of scary information in there. 

Russia’s Active Measures Architecture: Task and Purpose

 

 

 

[fraurosena]

Mr. Gleason tried to suppress information in the Cohen case (see one of my previous posts). The judge just denied his request.

 

[fraurosena]

Poor Paul can't get a break. His motions to dismiss keep being denied without prejudice.

 

[AmazonGrace]