Podcast Summary
Major development in US history: Flynn case dropped as 'fake,' 'fraud,' and 'hoax': The Department of Justice dropped the case against Michael Flynn, revealing it as a potentially misleading scandal involving the media and potential misconduct.
The case against former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was dropped by the Department of Justice due to it being deemed a "fake," "fraud," and "hoax." This revelation came after years of reporting on the matter, with Flynn's exoneration being described as a bombshell and a major development in the biggest scandal in US history. The media, who have been actively involved in the situation, are now reacting with confusion and outrage as they are implicated in the scandal. The focus is now shifting to holding those responsible accountable and uncovering new evidence. It's a significant moment in American politics, and it underscores the importance of truth and transparency.
Controversy over DOJ's dismissal of Flynn case: The DOJ's decision to dismiss the Michael Flynn case has sparked intense controversy, with some accusing it of being politically motivated and undermining the rule of law. The text message exchange between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page about an 'insurance policy' against Trump has fueled the debate, with calls for transparency and accountability.
The dismissal of the case against Michael Flynn by the Department of Justice (DOJ) has sparked intense controversy, with many criticizing the move as a politically motivated act that undermines the rule of law. The media has reacted strongly, with some commentators accusing the DOJ of being part of a disinformation campaign and even colluding with Russia. The text message exchange between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in August 2016, where they discuss an "insurance policy" against Donald Trump, has become a focal point of the debate, with some arguing that it shows Obama's administration knew about the investigation into the Trump campaign before the election. The controversy has led to calls for transparency and accountability, with many questioning what Obama knew and when. The dismissal of the Flynn case has far-reaching implications, potentially erasing criminal convictions from the Mueller investigation. The situation is a stark reminder of the importance of upholding the rule of law and maintaining the integrity of our justice system.
FBI's desperation to find something on Flynn led to early investigation: The FBI opened an investigation into Michael Flynn in August 2016 without substantial evidence due to his potential to expose intelligence community actions.
The FBI's decision to open an investigation into Michael Flynn on August 16, 2016, was likely driven by their desperation to find something on him due to his threat to expose the intelligence community's actions. The FBI didn't have any substantial evidence against Flynn at the time, but they went ahead and opened a case. This was part of a larger effort, as the FBI was discussing the idea of obtaining a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump team as early as August 15, 2016. The team proposed this idea themselves, and the next day, they opened a case on Flynn. The reasons for opening the case were later found to be embarrassing and are currently being investigated.
FBI Opened Late Investigation on Flynn Despite Earlier Dossier Information: The FBI opened a late investigation on Flynn based on the Steele dossier despite having earlier access to the information
On August 10, 2016, the FBI opened counterintelligence investigations on several members of the Trump team, including Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and Paul Manafort. However, they did not open an investigation on Michael Flynn. It was later discovered that a memo from the infamous Steele dossier, which mentioned Flynn's potential dealings with Russians, was dated August 10, 2016. The FBI had the dossier earlier than they claimed, but the information was not used to open an investigation on Flynn until August 16, 2016. It is suggested that someone in the White House may have pressured the FBI to open a case on Flynn, leading to the late investigation. The timing of the dossier memo and the FBI's subsequent investigation raise questions about the motivations behind the investigations and the role of political bias in the process.
Obama Administration Pushed for Flynn Investigation after FBI Failed to Act: Obama administration officials and intelligence community members pressed for an investigation into General Flynn's ties with Russia after the FBI initially declined to open a case based on a dossier. A chance encounter with a source provided valuable information, leading to the formal opening of the case in August 2016.
During the 2016 presidential election, individuals within the Obama administration and intelligence community, possibly including Obama himself, pushed for an investigation into General Michael Flynn's alleged ties with Russia. This push came after the FBI failed to open a case on August 10, 2016, based on a dossier. The next day, a source named Stefan Halper, who was believed to be Source 2 in the IG report, approached the Crossfire Hurricane team and claimed to have connections to Flynn and other subjects under investigation. Halper had reportedly known Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort for years and had previously interacted with Flynn. The FBI, in their own words, "stumbled upon" this valuable information and saw it as a lucky break. This incident marks the beginning of the efforts to spy on and take down Flynn, which can be traced back to 2014 when allegations of his affair with Svetlana Lakova at a dinner were made up. The FBI formally opened the case on August 16, 2016, and the events leading up to this point highlight the deep involvement of Obama administration insiders and Clinton's team in producing fake information to target a three-star general.
FBI's weak reasons for opening Michael Flynn investigation: The FBI's decision to open an investigation into Michael Flynn in 2016 was based on tenuous connections to potential criminal activity, including his advisory role to President Trump and Russian ties, but lacked sufficient evidence from the Steele dossier or the use of an informant.
The FBI's electronic communication (EC) regarding the opening of an investigation into Michael Flynn in August 2016 was based on weak reasons, including his advisory role to President Trump, his Russian connections, and his travel to Russia. The EC does not mention the Steele dossier or the FBI's use of an informant, but these factors were likely instrumental in initiating the investigation. The EC's focus on Flynn's advisory role and Russian ties, despite their tenuous connection to potential criminal activity, raises questions about the FBI's motivations and the credibility of the investigation. Additionally, the double standard in applying investigation criteria to individuals associated with the Trump team compared to those in the Obama administration further undermines the legitimacy of the probe.
Lack of Empirical Evidence for Allegations of Russian Collusion: Key Obama officials and Congressman accused of lying about Russian collusion lack concrete evidence to back their claims, and recent testimony releases further underscore this issue.
Key Obama administration officials, including former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan, as well as sitting member of Congress Adam Schiff, have been accused of lying to the public about evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia for three years. Despite their assertions, none of these individuals have produced any direct empirical evidence to support these claims. This matters in the context of the investigation into Michael Flynn, who was targeted due to allegations of Russian collusion, but for whom no concrete evidence has ever been presented. The recent release of previously hidden testimonies from these individuals before Congress further highlights the lack of evidence to support these claims. The media's role in propagating these allegations without fact-checking or demanding evidence is also a significant concern.
Obama administration officials' baseless allegations of Trump-Russia collusion: Despite lacking evidence, high-ranking Obama officials, including Jim Clapper and John Brennan, have repeatedly accused Trump of collusion with Russia. The media failed to hold them accountable for spreading misinformation.
Adam Schiff and other high-ranking officials under the Obama administration have been making allegations of collusion between Trump and Russia for years, despite having no concrete evidence to support these claims. The media, who have been reporting on these allegations without question, have failed to hold these officials accountable for their misinformation. The speaker argues that these officials, including Jim Clapper and John Brennan, are deeply troubled individuals who are angry at themselves for their own deceit and projecting that anger onto others. The Mueller investigation was set up to determine the truth about collusion, but the speaker believes that the evidence already available shows that there is no basis for these allegations. The speaker criticizes these officials for their lack of integrity and their damaging impact on the country.
FBI's Russian Collusion Investigation Origins: The FBI's Russian collusion investigation had multiple origins, including the unverified dossier and information from the State Department, but the dossier's falsity and the need to conceal its role led to a false narrative
The FBI's investigation into Russian collusion during the 2016 election was based on the unverified dossier, but when they discovered its falsity, they developed a cover story claiming they had received information from the Australians about Trump's advisor, Papadopoulos, regarding Russian dirt on Hillary Clinton. However, McCabe's testimony under oath reveals that the investigation did not begin solely based on the dossier but also on information from the State Department. Yet, the details of this information remain redacted. The investigation's origins were not truthfully represented, and the dossier's falsity undermines the legitimacy of the Russian collusion charges. The FBI's need to conceal the dossier's role led them to create a false narrative.
FBI's Russia probe started from a fake dossier, not Australian tip: Despite FBI's claim, the investigation into Trump campaign's ties to Russia was triggered by a fake dossier, not an Australian diplomat's tip in May 2016.
The FBI's investigation into the Trump campaign's alleged ties to Russia began not due to an Australian diplomat's tip in May 2016, but rather due to the receipt of a fake dossier compiled by Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS in July 2016. The FBI's subsequent insistence that they did not receive the Australian tip until July, and their opening of the investigation only after receiving the dossier, is a cover story to hide the fact that the dossier was the actual catalyst for the investigation. The inconsistencies in the timeline, as evidenced by text messages between FBI officials, further support this conclusion.
Intelligence officials worried about Michael Flynn's Russian connections: Intelligence officials kept an open case against Michael Flynn due to concerns over his Russian ties, despite finding no derogatory information.
In January 2017, as Donald Trump was about to take office, there was a panic among intelligence officials due to their inability to find derogatory information on Michael Flynn, who was about to become the incoming national security advisor. Despite their efforts to close the case against him, they kept it open at the last minute due to concerns that Flynn might uncover some dirty dealings. This is evident from a National Review article that reported an FBI agent intervened to keep the case open. The officials were particularly worried because they believed Flynn had knowledge of Russian dealings. Despite their surveillance and attempts to entrap Flynn, they found nothing and were forced to keep the case open to prevent him from discovering their activities.
FBI officials were concerned about Flynn's appointment and tried to keep an open case against him: Despite no derogatory information, FBI officials were deeply worried about Flynn's appointment as NSA and tried to keep an open case against him until the day before, possibly due to discussions at a dinner between Obama's intelligence directors.
High-ranking officials at the FBI, including Comey and McCabe, were deeply concerned about Mike Flynn being named as the National Security Advisor, and they tried to keep an open case against him until the day before his appointment, despite having no derogatory information. They were also worried about what was discussed at a dinner between Obama's National Intelligence Director, Jim Clapper, and CIA Director, John Brennan, on the same day that Flynn's appointment was announced. The following day, January 5, 2017, Comey, Obama, Biden, Rice, and others met at the White House, and Sally Yates, the Deputy Attorney General, was present. It was later disclosed that during this meeting, Obama asked for information on Flynn's conversation with the Russian Ambassador, and Yates recalled Comey mentioning the Logan Act, suggesting that they may have been planning to use this as a pretext to charge Flynn with a crime.
Obama Admin used the Logan Act to frame Flynn: The Obama administration orchestrated a plot to use the Logan Act against Flynn as a backup plan for failed Russian collusion allegations, coinciding with the wiping of related emails.
The Logan Act, a law that has never been successfully prosecuted in the history of the United States due to its vagueness and potential violation of the First Amendment, was used as a plot to frame Michael Flynn for an innocuous conversation with the Russian ambassador about sanctions. This scheme was orchestrated by high-ranking Obama administration officials, including President Obama himself, as a backup plan when their initial attempts to accuse Flynn of colluding with the Russians fell apart. The timing of this plot, which began on January 5th, 2017, coincides with the wiping clean of Christopher Steele's emails related to the dossier used as evidence in the initial Russian collusion investigation. This revelation sheds light on the extent to which the Obama administration was willing to go to undermine the incoming Trump administration.
Misrepresentation of Sources in Russian Collusion Dossier: The dossier used in the Russian collusion investigation contained misrepresented sources, with key figures like Christopher Steele and Stefan Halper having little to no involvement in the most damaging allegations. Halper, an FBI source, was paid by US taxpayer dollars for his research, adding to concerns about the investigation's legitimacy.
Key figures in the Russian collusion investigation, including Christopher Steele and Stefan Halper, misrepresented the sources of information used in the dossier. Steele, who was presented as the primary source, had nothing to do with some of the most damaging allegations, which actually came from Halper. Halper, who was also an FBI source, was present at a dinner where an allegation about Flynn's extramarital affair emerged, but Steele was not. Despite this, the FBI was led to believe that the information came from Steele. Furthermore, it was later discovered that US taxpayer dollars were used to pay Halper for his research, raising questions about the legitimacy of the entire investigation. The fact that a whistleblower who exposed this was then investigated himself adds to the controversy.
Obama officials misled Trump about dossier used to investigate Flynn: The investigation into Michael Flynn was based on false information from a discredited dossier paid for by the Pentagon. Obama officials briefed Trump about it, but the dossier's author was later disavowed by the British government.
The investigation into alleged security breaches involving Michael Flynn was based on false information from a dossier paid for by the Pentagon. The Obama administration officials, including Jim Comey, Susan Rice, and John Brennan, briefed President-elect Trump about the dossier on January 6, 2017. Flynn became suspicious and asked questions, leading the intelligence community to leak information to the media to put him at ease. The FBI interviewed Flynn on January 24, and although they did not find any wrongdoing, they charged him with lying to the FBI. However, the agents involved in the interview noted in their report that they did not believe Flynn was being deceptive. The entire case against Flynn and others in the Trump team was based on a hoax, as the British government had disavowed the credibility of the dossier's author, Christopher Steele, before the election.
Disappearance of Michael Flynn's FBI 302 form: The original FBI interview form with Michael Flynn, which reportedly stated he didn't lie, has vanished, fueling media speculation about his guilt.
The original 302 form from the FBI interview with Michael Flynn, which reportedly stated that Flynn did not lie, has disappeared. Despite testimony from former FBI Director James Comey that this original form exists, it cannot be found. This has allowed the media narrative to continue that Flynn lied during the interview. However, it is important to note that Flynn later pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, but the existence of the original 302 would challenge this narrative. The disappearance of this form is likely being used to support the media's ongoing coverage of the case. In other news, the unemployment rate in the US has reached a record high of 14%, with 20.5 million jobs lost in April. Despite this, there was a positive development as Shelley Luther, a business owner who refused to close her salon despite lockdown orders, was released from jail after a public outcry.