Democrats and members of the media were buzzing about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s guilty plea about making false statements to the FBI.
They were convinced Robert Mueller was in possession of the smoking gun that proved Trump colluded with Russia.
But the real truth is so shocking, it will change what you thought about everything.
Flynn’s guilty plea was not the bombshell the media made it out to be.
As part of a guilty plea, a defendant must confess to what he did.
In his pleading, Flynn admitted to making false statements to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian Ambassador during the Trump transition.
But there was nothing in there about collusion or the campaign.
If Mueller had any evidence of collusion, or was building that case, it would have been included in what Flynn pled guilty to.
Andrew McCarthy writes at National Review that this means the collusion investigation is over:
“Trading a plea on minor charges for cooperation is a foolish gambit that badly damages the prosecutor’s case. It suggests that the cooperator must not have disclosed details about the major scheme. Otherwise the prosecutor would have charged him with it. It implies that the prosecutor is so desperate to make a case on a major target that he gave bad actors a pass on serious charges — something experienced prosecutors know that juries hate.
It is even worse to plead accomplices out on false-statements counts. This establishes that the main thing the jury should know about the accomplice is that he is not to be trusted. That is not how you make someone a strong witness. And unlike the accomplice who pleads guilty to the major scheme, an accomplice who pleads guilty to false statements is looking at a maximum sentence of just five years and a more likely sentence of no time even before he has cooperated — not much of an incentive to disclose everything and tell the truth. A good prosecutor does not front-load the benefits of cooperation; he makes the accomplice earn sentencing leniency by full disclosure and testimony. The pleas and the indictment have nothing to do with collusion because Mueller has no collusion case.
Bottom line: If the FBI had a collusion case of some kind, after well over a year of intensive investigation, Flynn and Papadopoulos would have been pressured to plead guilty to very serious charges — and those serious offenses would be reflected in the charges lodged against Manafort. Obviously, the pleas and the indictment have nothing to do with collusion because Mueller has no collusion case.”
Trump has insisted from the start that the Russian collusion was a fake news hoax invented by the Democrats to excuse away Hillary Clinton’s election loss.
After 18 months of investigation – first by the FBI and then by Robert Mueller – not one shred of proof has surfaced.
The bottom line is that the fairy tale the Democrats told about Russian collusion was used to launch a politically-motivated investigation by Mueller in order to produce grounds for impeaching Trump.
There was no collusion with Russia.
It always was a lie to suggest there was.
But the lie was used for an even more sinister purpose – overturning the results of the 2016 election.
