Flynn's fall this morning was a well-thought out plan to avoid the worst. Many believe he made a deal to protect his son from legal implication. Admirable or not, it was their only move. The press will try to blow this out of proportion.
Here's what you can say to the sheep still among your unwoken flock:
-
Flynn was charged with a SINGLE COUNT of making false statements to the FBI. He was not charged with "collusion" of anything having to do with the 2016 election being compromised by Russian influence. (Don't bother trying to explain to your sheep friends that collusion is not a crime...)
FROM CNN: Flynn is being charged for making false statements, but not for any improper actions during the campaign.
-
Flynn's being accused of speaking with Russian Ambassador about how they and others around the world were leaning in a vote for a resolution about Israel, NOT for trying to influence or sway American voters in the 2016 election.
FROM the same CNN article: According to an FBI statement, Flynn communicated with then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak after being asked by a senior Trump transition official to find out how foreign governments stood on a coming UN Security Council resolution about Israel.
-
Trump FIRED Flynn. Trump didn't trust him because he lied to them about his own actions. What actions? Speaking with foreign nationals, including Russian Ambassadors. Why does that matter? IT WAS HIS JOB as National Security Advisor to do so.
FROM TIME ARTICLE: Trump and others in the Administration had lost faith in Flynn after he misled Vice President Mike Pence on whether he had discussed Russian sanctions with the Russian Ambassador to the U.S.
Long story short: This has nothing to do with the validity of Trump's election, nor does it affect or change anything in the narrative Trump has provided to the public. Flynn took one for the team. And he did it to protect his son. I must admit it's a bit of a relief to see someone doing something nice around here for children for a change...
view the rest of the comments →
Kacey ago
How is this directly relevant to the Pizzagate investigation (see rule 1) " Relevance: Posts must be directly relevant to investigation of Pizzagate: the sexual/physical abuse and/or murder of children by elites, child trafficking organized by elites, and/or cover-up of these activities and/or the protection/assistance provided to the people who engage in said activities." What in the title establishes direct relevance to Pizzagate - rule 3 Clarity: All titles must adequately describe post content and must establish direct relevance to pizzagate."
Having had submissions deleted because I violated these rules I just want to be sure that the application of the rules is consistent.
YogSoggoth ago
Because everyone knows that Hillary lost to Trump, partially, because of alt right fake news like pizzagate(sarc), except you.
Kacey ago
I presume the rules were made as they were made because new people just finding the thread would not know how flynn relates to pizzagate without more information. One thing I know how to do is read
3: Clarity: All titles must adequately describe post content and must establish direct relevance to pizzagate Has the word "all" suddenly changed its meaning when I wasn't looking? What about the word "must", has it too changed its meaning? Or is it the case that the rules are being used selectively to ban the submissions of some people and not others?
I suspect that Hillary did not lose to Trump because of Pizzagate (outside of a small circle most people never heard about it as far as I can tell). But your statement still does not connect Flynn to pizzagate.