The Flynn Saga

David and Sarah discuss the latest after Michael Flynn’s defense claims FBI notes show agents ...

By
9

David and Sarah discuss the latest after Michael Flynn’s defense claims FBI notes show agents tried to entrap him, the viability of third-parties as Justin Amash flirts with running for president, and some legal news updates.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

By
Comments (9)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Tom Westberg

    It may be a bit late and there's no news peg, but I'd really love to hear a crossover podcast between Advisory Opinions and The McCarthy Report. David has one set of facts he uses for his arguments, and Andy McCarthy at NR has a slightly different set. Nothing really seems to be contradictory, you both just seem to.. leave out things inconvenient to your position. An actual discussion with someone holding opposing views (especially as you both could do it and remain civil) would be great.

    Collapse
  2. Jason Runyan

    I wish I would have been more familiar with David during the 2016 election. I would have enjoyed throwing my vote away on him then Evan McMullen, who lately i have found to be a bit of a nut bag.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Julia

    Agree with Sarah's assessment of Gerwig's Little Women. I found it refreshing to see girls/women learning to acknowledge life's trade-offs and make decisions with those trade-offs in mind instead of remaining adolescents who spend all their energy whining incessantly for society to magically fix itself so trade-offs won't exist anymore. (Although after watching straight through Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul, Odenkirk as the dad was super-distracting.)

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Rev Snow

    David recounted the FARA false statements charge against Flynn: "On March 7, 2017 -- which is when he's the sitting National Security Advisor of the United States -- he filed multiple documents...."

    Flynn resigned the NSA position on February 13, 2017.

    https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/read-michael-flynns-resignation-letter/2330/

    What should I make of this discrepancy?

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    John Russell

    I liked David's comment that he refuses to grant the claim by supporters of the two major parties---acting as a cartel---that the cartel is entitled to his vote for president regardless of what shortcomings the two major-party nominees have

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Mike.Podhaizer

    Regarding third party voting, my view is that it's just bad politics to support people who don't credibly promise to uphold or support your interests and standards. I don't like bloc voting by immutable categoires, but voting coalitions make a lot of sense. If you can gather a coalition to make a credible threat to vote third-party as a negotiation tool, then why not? On the other hand my, perhaps cynical, view is that an individual vote only makes a real difference as a social signal (not in a shallow way), but that otherwise it doesn't really matter.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Fascinating pod. You used the word “context” a few times, and Sarah’s speculation of how the notes might reveal a straw man argument scenario was great. I have seen this many, many times in my diplomatic career. I often disabuse folks when they think language in a State Department or Embassy cable (quaint word) is a slam dunk on some issue; they actually contain a lot of speculation, descriptions of others’ views, etc. like these notes, reading them without context can be worse than useless; it can lead you to the OPPOSITE of what was really being said. On context, though, why not include in your analysis the larger picture of proven and alleged FBI (and other government) abuses before and after Trump’s election? The tactics chosen to pursue Flynn look different without that context, I think. Arguments that “this is how the FBI works” are interesting (and disgusting) but insufficient given the larger abuse atmosphere, I think. A cultural comment: you rightly cite folks cheering as TV detectives and prosecutors trick suspects...ignoring that they are almost always presented as GUILTY suspects. We non-lawyers are perhaps inconsistent, but human nature would not have us cheer episodes where police trick the innocent. Not arguing Flynn’s innocence, just responding to why folks may be “shocked, shocked” by tactics they see every night on tv. If THEY aren’t convinced Flynn is guilty, they won’t like the show.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    William Hultman

    Why did you not watch or mention Pitch Black? The movie that first show the Riddick character.

    Collapse
  9. Anthony

    As always, enjoyed your podcast (and David's piece) on Flynn. But I wanted to register a little disagreement with you on the "get him fired" part of the notes. Sure, the FBI is not in the business of firing people, nor should it be.

    However, I don't think the analysis ends there. Let's take the military context - the military can deal with misconduct either through criminal prosecution or "administrative" (i.e. firing) action. While that is unique among federal agencies (who don't have their own criminal jurisdiction over employees), the FBI or any other of dozens of federal investigative agencies certainly are involved in that sort of process for federal employees (such as NSA chief Flynn). A federal investigation may not result in prosecution, but the derogatory information may still be shared with the subject's supervisory chain/legal office at the agency they work for. Then that agency decides if they fire or otherwise administratively discipline that Agents know this, and it's not wrong or improper for the investigating agents to at least be thinking about that as a possible outcome of their investigation - even though it is not their call, they still are aware that, when dealing with a federal employee, there are other adverse outcomes possible apart from just criminal prosecution. Also, as you know, FBI is involved in all sorts of investigative activity that is not necessarily prosecution-focused. And I would also stress that these were handwritten notes, not an official action memo. This just doesn't strike me as an unreasonable thing for an agent to be brainstorming as they decide how to approach a witness or subject. All of that is to say, I don't think the "get him fired" note is all that irregular or outrageous, based on what we know now.

    Collapse