Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in December, and became one of the first casualties in the “Trump/Russia” witch hunt.
What got Flynn in trouble were his answers during an interview with two FBI agents on February 24th, 2017. One of the agents was the notoriously anti-Trump Peter Strzok. Flynn was questioned about two phone calls he had with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak after the 2016 presidential election. Because Kislyak’s calls were intercepted and monitored by the FBI, Strzok had a transcript of Flynn’s conversations in front of him as he questioned Flynn.
Basically, Strzok was quizzing Flynn on the contents of his own conversation. Flynn’s only crime was “lying” to the FBI for not perfectly remembering the contents of two phone conversations.
It’s the kind of charge you’d see against someone the government wanted to shut up, and it seems like that’s exactly what happened. As we reported earlier this week, in March,
Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional. As a result, some of those in attendance came away with the impression that Flynn would not be charged with a crime pertaining to the Jan. 24 interview.
So clearly something changed.
Now, according to the Gateway Pundit, there are some changes that could hint that Flynn may not wind up in nearly as much trouble as initially expected.
The judge assigned to Flynn’s case now is Emmet G. Sullivan. Judge Sullivan immediately issued what is called a “Brady” order requiring Mueller to provide Flynn all information that is favorable to the defense whether with respect to guilt or punishment.
This development is huge. Prosecutors almost never provide this kind of information to a defendant before he enters a plea — much less after he has done so. Judge Sullivan is the perfect judge to decide General Flynn’s motion, because he’s held federal prosecutors in contempt for failing to disclose evidence, dismissed the corrupted prosecution of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and appointed a special prosecutor to investigate the Department of Justice.
Whether or not this will change the outcome of the case depends on whether or not there actually is “not-yet-produced evidence” that might help Flynn. Even if so, could it have any effect on the case in which Flynn has already pleaded guilty?
What do you think? Will Michael Flynn be let off the hook? Tell us your thoughts below, and share this story over Facebook now!